from  f 0e  feifirarg  of 

(ptofmot  nrtfftam  J^enrg  (green 

Q5equeat0e^  6g  ^im  fo 
f  ^e  feifirarp  of 

(pttnceton  e?eo%tcaf  ^emtnat^ 

BL    181     .L67    1869 
'?817-?^0%^'^^   EliPhalet, 
^ri^"!   °.^   ^^tural   and 


EVIDENCES 


NATURAL    AND    REVEALED 


THEOLOGY. 


BY 


CHARLES    E.    LORD. 


PHILADELPHIA : 

J.    B.    LIPPINCOTT    &    CO 

18  6  9. 


Entere-l  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1869,  by 

J.  B.  LIPPINCOTT  &  CO., 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Pennsylvania. 


MY  WIFE, 


MY  BEST  COUNSELOR  AND  FRIEND, 


'^ffetlionatelj)    ijetlicatc 
THE     FOLLOWING    PAGES. 


PREFACE. 


It  seems  most  suitable  that  the  first  truths  which  lie  at 
the  foundation  of  all  Revealed  Theology  should  be  consid- 
ered in  the  light  of  Natural  Theology;  both  have  a  most  in- 
timate relation  to  each  other.  The  present  treatise  on  those 
subjects,  which  would  properly  come  under  the  range  of 
Natural  Theology,  is  written  with  the  great  end  in  view  of 
making  mare  forcible  and  clear  the  evidences  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  and  giving  to  the  mind  a  deeper  conviction  of 
the  supreme  authority  of  Revelation.  It  will  be  seen,  also, 
that  a  book  that  should  in  one  volume  treat  of  the  great 
variety  of  subjects  that  would  come  under  the  head  of  Natu- 
ral and  Revealed  Theology,  must  of  necessity  be  but  a  com- 
pend,  and  aim  chiefly  at  brevity,  rather  than  at  elaborate 
argument  upon  any  one  department  of  truth,  especially  as 
this  might  not  be  so  favorable  for  general  reading,  or  make 
it  so  desirable  for  use  in  our  schools  or  higher  institutions 
of  learning. 

I  send  forth  this  work  with  the  hope  that  it  may  not  only 
be  acceptable  to  the  general  reader,  but  prove  a  welcome 
help  to  those  who  are  engaged  in  the  cause  of  education. 
The  Index  to  Authors  will  be  found  of  service  to  all  who 
may  wish  to  enter  upon  an  extended  investigation  of  any  of 
the  subjects  treated  upon  in  this  book. 

CHARLES  E.  LORD. 

Beverly,  N.  J.,  September  1,  1869. 

(V) 


CONTENTS  OF  NATURAL  THEOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

EFFICIENT   CAUSATION    AND   FINAL   CAUSATION. 

PAGE 

What  is  to  be  understood  by  Efficient  Causation  and  Final  Causation  ? — Mind  and 
Matter. — Consciousness  the  Instrument  of  the  Knowledge  of  Immaterial  Sub- 
stances.— Distinction  between  Matter  and  Mind. — Author  of  the  Human 
Mind. — Argument  of  the  Materialist. — Material  Laws. — Sir  John  Hersehel. — 
Theory  of  Gradual  Development. — Physical  Causation. — Common  Idea  of 
Cause. — Cause  and  Existence. — Brown. — Mental  Causation. — Distinction  be- 
tween Person  and  Thing. — Necessarian  and  Libertarian  Theories. — No  Infi- 
nite Series  of  Causes. — Paley  on  Final  Causes. — Miracles. — Atheism  in  Rela- 
tion to  General  Laws. — Bo  wen 19 

CHAPTER  IL 

WHAT    ARE   MATTERS   OP    FACT? 

What  are  Matters  of  Fact? — Consciousness. — The  Senses. — Classification  of  the 
Facts  of  Consciousness. — The  Sphere  of  the  Senses. — Why  the  Facts  of  Con- 
sciousness are  investigated. — Law  of  Facts. — Distinction  between  the  Facts  of 
the  Senses  and  Consciousness. — Fundamental  Law  of  the  Consciousness. — 
Jouflfroy .S3 

CHAPTER  IIL 

GENERAL  LAWS  OF  THE  EARTH  AND  SUN. 

Definition  of  a  General  Law. — Whewell. — Laws  of  Gravity. — Distribution  of  the 
Day  and  the  Year. — Exactness  in  the  Length  of  the  Day. — The  Sun. — New- 
ton.— Properties  of  Light. — Laws  of  Heat. — The  Atmosphere. — Water. — Laws 
of  Friction. — Stability  of  the  Solar  System. — Laplace 39 

CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    DEVELOPMENT    THEORY. 

Vestiges  of  Creation — M.  Miiller. — Law  substituted  for  God  in  the  Development 
Theory. — Derogatory  to  Human  Nature. — Creation  by  Miracle. — Researches 
of  Geology  fatal  to  the  Development  Theory. — Agassiz. — Sedgwick. — Hitch- 
cock.— Hugh  Miller 55 

CHAPTER  V. 

MUTUAL   ADAPTATION   OF   THE    VEGETABLE   AND   ANIMAL    KINGDOM. 

Vegetable  Growth. — Generation  of  Animals. — Principles  of  Compensation  and 
Equalization. — Buckland. — No  Abortive  Creation  of  Species. — Fitness  of 
Constitution 62 


Cvii) 


viii  CONTENTS  OF  NATUBAL   THEOLOGY. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

PROCESS   OF    GENERATION   IN   ANIMALS    AND   GERMINATION    IN    PLANTS. 

PAGE 

Generation  a  Process. — Incorrect  Use  of  the  Language  Principle  of  Generation. — 
Elementary  Cause  of  Animal  and  Vegetable  Existence. — Fichte. — The  Art- 
ist's Studio. — Bowen. — No  Evidence  of  Mechanism  in  the  First  Germs  of 
Vegetable  and  Animal  Life. — Threefold  Union  of  Mechanism,  Life,  and  Mind     65 

CHAPTER  VII. 

PROSPECTIVE   CONTRIVANCES   OF    ANIMALS. 

Recuperative  Power  of  the  Animal  Economy. — Prospective  Contrivances  of  Ani- 
mals.— The  Heron  and  Cormorant. — Solan  Goose. — Tongue  of  the  Wood- 
pecker.— Air-bladder  of  the  Fish. — Fang  of  a  Viper. — Bag  of  the  Opossum. 
— Stomach  of  the  Camel. — Young  of  Animals. — Proboscis  of  the  Elephant. — 
The  Crane. — The  Spider's  Web. — The  Lobster. — Gizzard  of  Birds. — Locomo- 
tion of  Reptiles  and  Birds 72 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   SENSES. 

Relationship  of  the  Senses  to  the  Nerves. — Adaptation  of  the  World  without  us 
to  the  World  within  us. — The  Connection  of  the  Senses  with  the  Mind. — Sir 
Charles  Bell.— The  Eye.— Dr.  Dick.— The  Hearing.— Seat  of  the  Senses         .     76 

CHAPTER  IX. 

LIFE    AND   INSTINCT. 

Definition  of  Life  by  Stahl,  Humboldt,  Kant,  Bichat,  and  Schmidt. — Life  and  Or- 
ganization.— Chemical  Affinity  and  Change. — Origin  of  Life. — Instinct. — Its 
Distinction  from  Reason  ...........     SI 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE    HUMAN    BODY   AND    MIND,    AND   THE    TESTIMONY  OF    HISTORY    AND   SCIENCE    UPON   THE 

ORIGIN   OF    MAN. 

Man  a  Complex  Machine. — Regularity  of  the  Animal  Structure. — Package. — 
Beauty  of  the  Body. — Pelling. — Testimony  of  History  and  Science  upon  the 
Origin  of  Man 86 

CHAPTER  XL 

COMPARATIVE    PHYSIOLOGY,    AND    PHYSICAL    GEOGRAPHY. 

Relation  of  the  Inorganic  Kingdom  to  the  Organic. — Globules  of  Blood  in  Herba- 
ceous and  Carnivorous  Animals. — M.  Jussieu. — George  Taylor. — Agassiz. — 
Harmony  existing  in  the  Laws  of  Heat  and  Light  in  the  Vegetable  King- 
dom.— Hunt. — Chemical  Composition  of  the  Animal  and  Vegetable  King- 
dom.— Physical  Geography  of  the  Earth 90 

CHAPTER  XIL 

MEANING   OF   THE   TERMS   NATURE    AND   CHANCE. 

Meaning  of  the  Word  Nature. — Original  Power  and  Imparted  Power. — No  Self- 
creation. — First  and  Second  Causes. — Fortuitous  Concourse  of  Atoms  and 
Chance  unmeaning 95 


CONTENTS  OF  NATURAL   THEOLOGY.  ix 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

UNITY    OP    DESIGN   IN   NATURE. 

PAGE 

Dependencies  of  One  Part  of  Nature  upon  Another. — Collocations  and  Adjustments 
of  Nature  showing  Unity  of  Design. — Plurality  of  Gods  impossible. — Cuvier. 
— Unity  of  God  shown  in  the  Intellectual  and  Moral  World. — No  Infinite 
Series  of  Causes  and  Efifects. — Pascal 99 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

GENERAL    HAPPINESS   OP    ANIMAL   EXISTENCE,  AND    INTELLECTUAL   AND    MORAL    ACTION 
REVEALING   THE    GOODNESS   AND    MERCY    OF    GOD. 

Happiness  the  Rule  of  Animal  Existence. — Suffering  the  Exception. — Absolute 
Dependence  upon  God. — Gratuitous  Nature  of  Divine  Blessings. — Sportive 
Movements  of  the  Young  of  Animals. — Physical,  Mental,  and  Moral  Happi- 
ness.— Benevolence  of  God. — Uniform  Rule  of  Mental  and  Moral  Action. — 
Variety  of  Pleasures  springing  from  each. — Divine  Goodness  bearing  the 
Impress  of  Mercy. — Jeremy  Taylor 105 

CHAPTER  XV. 

THE    ESTHETIC    NATURE     OP   MAN. 

.Esthetic  Nature  of  Man. — Elements  of  the  Beautiful  and  the  Sublime. — Their 
Relation  to  the  Moral  Nature. — Milton. — Developments  of  the  Principle  of 
Taste 115 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE    IMAGINATION. 

The  Imagination. — External  World  adapted  to  it. — Its  Existence  revealing  Divine 
Wisdom  and  Goodness.  —  Gray.  —  Early  Development  of  the  Imagination. 
— Chatterton. — Hebrew  Poetry. — The  Imagination  degraded  ....  120 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

CONSIDERATION     OP    ANGER   AND    SHAME,    THE    LOVE    OP   AMITY,    OP   SOCIETY,    AND    THE 
POSSESSION    OF    PROPERTY. 

Anger  instinctive  and  deliberate. — Under  certain  Relations  right  and  useful. — 
Brown. — The  Emotion  of  Shame. — How  serviceable. — Love  of  Family. — The 
Support  it  gives  to  Society. — Industry,  Foresight,  and  Kindness  called  by 
it  into  Exercise. — The  Love  of  Possession. — Care  of  Society  to  protect  the 
Rights  of  Property. — The  Constitution  of  Man  under  all  its  Aspects  showing 
the  Workmanship  of  God 125 

CHAPTER  XVIIL 

OMNISCIENCE,    OMNIPRESENCE,    AND   SPIRITUALITY   OP    GOD. 

Omniscience  and  Omnipresence  of  God. — Our  Knowledge  of  the  Attributes  of  God 
derived  from  their  Manifestation. — Dewar. — Presence  of  God  in  His  Works. — 
Spirituality  of  God. — Matter  finite. — God  not  circumscribed  to  the  Sphere 
of  Matter. — Not  restricted  by  Time  or  Space 130 


CONTENTS   OF  NATUBAL    THEOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE  EQUITY  AND  BENEVOLENCE  OF  GOD   SHOWN  FROM  THE  MORAL  CONSTITUTION   OP  MAN. 

PAGE 

The  Nature  of  Conscience.— The  Question  of  Happiness  and  Duty.— The  Moral 
Constitution  of  Man. — The  End  aimed  at  by  God  in  Man's  Moral  Constitu- 
tion.— The  Peculiar  Prerogative  of  Conscience. — Conscience  unperverted  an 
Indication  of  the  Moral  Character  of  God. — Conscience  as  it  is,  and  as  it  should 
jg. — Sir  James  Mackintosh. — Consciousness. — The  Decision  of  Conscience. — 
Dugald  Stewart. — The  Relation  of  the  Intellect  to  the  Moral  Sense. — Upham. — 
Butler. — Conscience  as  a  Law,  a  Feeling,  and  a  Judge. — The  Law  of  Associa- 
tion.— Bowen. — Virtue. — McCosh. — Personality.  —  Freedom.  —  Pantheism. — 
Wilson.  — Self-evident  Truths. — Fenelon. — Alexander. — Pascal. — The  Heart 
and  the  Mind. — The  Professed  End  of  Human  Government. — Evidence  of  the 
Attributes  of  God  arising  from  the  Moral  Constitution  of  Man    ■     .         .         .  134 

CHAPTER  XX. 

"the    PROBLEM    OF    PHYSICAL    AND   MORAL   EVIL." 

Leibnitz. — The  Present  Universe  in  its  Totality  may  have  in  it  more  Happiness 
than  any  other. — The  Possibility  of  Sin  necessary  to  Moral  Freedom. — 
Lactantius. — The  Infinite  cannot  be  restricted  to  Actual  Development. — Presi- 
dent Appleton. — The  Greatest  Good  Virtue,  not  Happiness. — Pain  and  Death 
in  the  Brute  Creation. — Sin,  and  Man's  Freedom. — Suffering  essential  for  the 
Trial  of  Virtue. — Horace  Bushnell 170 

CHAPTER  XXL 

THE  NATURAL  AND  THE  SUPERNATURAL. 

Law  not  causative,  but  expressive. — Prof.  Nichol. — The  Natural  the  Sphere  of 
Second  Causes. — Regularity  in  Natural  Law. — The  End  for  which  Nature  is 
made. — Limitations  of  Nature. — The  Supernatural. — Prof.  George  Fisher. — 
Tendency  at  the  Present  Day  to  Pantheism. — Cause  of  Natural  and  Revealed 
Religion  bound  up  together. — Nature  and  its  Laws  do  not  conflict  with  the 
Development  of  the  Supernatural. — The  Six  Great  Epochs  of  Creation. — Prof. 
Tayler  Lewis. — Miracle  necessary. — The  Cyclical  Law  of  all  Natures. — Ar- 
nold.— The  Human  and  the  Divine. — Constitution  of  Nature  as  to  Mind  and 
Matter. — The  First  Links  in  the  Chain  of  Causation  concealed. — Different 
Aspects  of  the  Supernatural. — Polytheism. — Romanism. — Ideal,  and  Material- 
istic Pantheism. — Deism. — Rationalism. — Philosophy  of  the  Intuitions  and 
the  Feelings. — Infidelity  contrasted  with  Superstition. — Horace  Bushnell      .  184 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

THE    HUMAN,    THE   SUPERHUMAN,    AND   THE    DIVINE. 

What  is  comprehended  in  the  Human. — No  Part  of  Man's  Nature  supernatural. 
— Universality  of  the  Law  of  Cause  and  Efi"ect  in  all  Creatures  and  Things. — 
Human  Volitions  self-caused. — Necessity  the  Condition  of  Force  in  Things. 
— Freedom  of  Human  Volitions. — Evidence  of  Consciousness. — Sophistry 
concealed  under  the  Language  "  Strongest  Motive." — The  True  Idea  of 
Human  Liberty. — The  Complex  Nature  of  Motives. — Identity  of  the  Super- 
natural with  the  Divine. — The  Sphere  of  its  Activity. — The  Mental  Constitu- 
tion of  Man. — Twofold  Character  of  Human  Freedom. — Distinction  between 
the  Strongest  Motive  and  the  Successful  Motive. — Force  in  the  World  of  Matter 
and  Mind. — -The  Superhuman. — The  Miraculous  restricted  to  the  Supernatu- 
ral.— Law  as  applied  to  the  Deity. — Second  Causes. — The  Divine  Action  upon 
Things  and  Persons. — The  Law  of  Causality  in  Things  and  Persons. — Dis- 
tinction between  Wonders  and  Miracles. — Proper  Classification  of  the  Human, 
Superhuman,  and  the  Divine. — What  is  Sin  ? — Sin  toward  God. — Sin  toward 
Man. — Necessity  of  the  Interposition  of  the  Divine  in  Human  Affairs  .         .  213 


CONTENTS   OF  NATURAL   THEOLOGY.  xi 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

LIMITATIONS   OF    HUMAN   THOITGHT. 

■PAQB 

The  Senses  and  Consciousness  the  Instruments  of  Human  Thought. — Variety  of 
Development  in  Different  Minds. — Original  Differences  in  the  Human  Facul- 
ties.— Limitations  of  the  Mind  respecting  Things  Material  and  Immaterial. — 
Primary  Ideas. — Essence  of  Soul  and  Body. — Objects  of  the  External  World. 
— The  Accommodation  of  God  to  the  Limitations  of  Human  Thought. — Influ- 
ence of  Sin  in  shutting  out  God  from  the  Mind. — The  Real  Knowledge  of  Man 
mostly  confined  to  Simple  Facts. — Belief  as  related  to  Human  Conduct. — 
Mode  of  the  Manifestation  of  God  to  Man. — Law  of  Cause  and  Effect. — Di- 
vine Purposes  and  Free  Agency. — The  Finite  and  the  Infinite. — The  Incarna- 
tion of  Christ  considered  simply  as  a  Fact. — God  in  the  Incarnation  of  His 
Son  coming  under  Human  Limitations. — First  Cause  and  Second  Causes. — 
Mind  and  Matter. — Time  and  Eternity. — The  Absolute  and  the  Created.—  ''elf- 
Existence,  and  Existence  begun. — Human  Personality  and  Divine  Person- 
ality.— Divine  Government  and  Probation. — Punishment  and  Reward  .         .  227 

CHAPTER  XXIV, 


Atheism  upon  the  Supposition  that  there  is  no  God. — It  removes  the  Highest  In- 
centive to  Virtue,  and  the  Greatest  Restraint  upon  Vice. — It  does  not  help  to 
Usefulness  in  the  Family  Relation. — The  Atheist  is  deprived  of  one  great 
Source  of  Pleasure  springing  from  the  Recognition  of  an  Intelligent  Cause. — 
His  Highest  Rule  of  Conduct  must  be  Human  Authority. — Atheism,  true  or 
false,  is  revolting  to  the  Conscience. — It  gives  to  the  Future  nothing  but 
Gloom,  Uncertainty,  and  Doubt. — Atheism  upon  the  Supposition  that  there  is 
a  God. — God's  Existence  reveals  the  Fact  of  His  Government. — The  Impress 
of  the  Divine  Authority  manifested  in  the  Constitution  of  Man. — Divine 
Government  always  on  the  side  of  Virtue. — Law  and  Grace. — Atheism  espe- 
cially seated  in  the  Heart. — Nature  and  Revelation  both  opposed  to  Atheism. 
— Atheism  considered  under  the  Ills  of  Life. — Atheism  destitute  of  all  Reason 
and  an  Enemy  to  the  Progress  of  Society  in  Intelligence,  Virtue,  or  Happiness. 
— It  shuts  the  Mind  up  to  the  Present  Hour. — The  Atheist  Code  of  Morals 
contrasted  with  Christianity. — Atheism  as  developed  in  the  French  Revolu- 
tion.— Its  Criminality  and  Ruin 247 


CONTENTS  OF  REVEALED  THEOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

NECESSITY   OF    A    REVELATION   PROM    GOD. 

PAGE 

Insufficiency  of  the  Light  of  Nature. — Objections  of  Infidelity  to  the  Christian 
Scheme. — The  Law  of  Belief. — Real  Question  at  Issue. — Probability  of  a  Rev- 
elation from  the  Character  of  God. — Revelation  necessary  from  the  Existing 
Condition  of  the  Conscience,  and  from  Human  Experience. — Plato,  Socrates, 
Seneca,  Ovid,  Pliny,  Clement. — What  has  Natural  Religion  accomplished  ? — 
Ancient  and  Modern  Paganism. — Natural  Religion  unable  to  discover  an 
Effectual  Remedy  for  Sin. — The  Voice  of  Conscience. — Doctrine  of  Revela- 
tion as  to  the  Remedy  for  Sin. — Contrast  existing  between  the  Bible  and  all 
other  Systems  of  Belief  and  Practice 261 

CHAPTER  II. 

CHRIST. 

The  Interval  of  Thirty-five  Years  between  the  Death  of  Christ  and  the  Perse- 
cution of  the  Christians  under  Nero. — Testimony  of  Tacitus. — ^Jewish  Ac- 
counts of  Christ. — Character  of  Christ. — Christ  as  portrayed  by  the  Four 
Evangelists. — Christ's  Humanity. — Christ  in  what  He  said  of  Himself. — Tes- 
timony of  Thomas. — Unity  of  Purpose  in  Christ's  Life. — Unworldly  Nature  of 
Christ's  Life 281 

CHAPTER  IIL 

CHRIST    AS    A    MORALIST,    LEGISLATOR,    REDEEMER,    AND    KING. 

State  of  Morality  at  Christ's  Coming. — "  Ecce  Homo." — The  Legalists  and  Com- 
mon People. — Morality  as  taught  by  Christ. — Teaching  of  Christ  as  to  the 
Fatherhood  of  God,  the  Soul,  and  a  Future  State. — Legislation  of  Moses  and 
Christ  contrasted. — Address  of  Christ  to  the  Samaritan  AVoman. — Motives  to 
Obedience  presented  by  Christ. — Adaptation  of  Christ's  Legislation  to  the 
Success  of  His  Cause. — The  Radical  Change  Christ  introduced  into  Society. — 
Christ  as  the  Redeemer. — Necessity  existing  for  a  Vicarious  Sacrifice. — The 
Incarnation. — Young. — Christ  as  a  King. — Jewish  View  of  the  Kingship  of 
Christ. — Spirituality  of  this  Kingship. — The  Tribute  Money. — Christ's  Mis- 
sion to  the  World. — Kingdom  of  Christ  built  upon  Love         ....  295 

CHAPTER  IV. 

EVIDENCE    OF    MIRA*CLES. 

Probability  of  Miracles. — Necessity  of  Miracles  at  the  Commencement  of  the 
Christian  Era. — Christ's  Testimony  to  the  Value  of  His  Miracles. — False  View 
of  Nature. — Redemption  an  End  worthy  of  Miracles. — No  Presumptive  Evi- 
dence against  them  with  this  End  in  view. — Miraculous  Interposition  at  Great 
Epochs  of  Time. — Moral  Element  connected  with  Scripture  Miracles. — Mir- 
acles of  the  Bible  contrasted  with  other  Miracles  professed  to  be  worked. — 
Definition  of  a  True  Miracle     ..........  315 


(Xii) 


CONTENTS   OF  REVEALED    THEOLOGY.  xiii 


CHAPTER  V. 

MIRACLES   OF    CHRIST. 

PAGE 

Miracles  of  Moses  contrasted  with  those  of  Christ. — Superiority  of  Christ's 
Miracles  to  all  other  Miracles. — The  Age  when  Christ  worked  Miracles. — Con- 
fession of  their  Reality  by  the  Pharisees,  but  Ascription  to  Beelzebub. — Mira- 
cles of  Christ,  unless  true,  must  have  been  exposed. — How  Christ's  Miracles 
excelled  all  others  :  1.  Number.  2.  Freedom  and  Ease.  3.  Larger  and  more 
glorious.     4.  Worked  in  His  own  Name  and  Power. — Trench.         .         .         .  330 

CHAPTER  VI. 

BIRTH,    RESURRECTION,    AND   ASCENSION   OF    CHRIST,   AND    MIRACLES    OF    HIS   APOSTLES. 

Circumstances  connected  with  Christ's  Advent  into  the  World. — Resurrection  of 
Christ. — Impossibility  of  Deception. — Substantial  Agreement  of  the  Four 
Evangelists. — Ascension  of  Christ. — Peter  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost. — Mir- 
acles of  the  Apostles 341 

CHAPTER  VII. 

MIRACLES   OF   MOSES. 

The  Ten  Plagues  of  Egypt. — Idol-Worship  of  Egypt. — Necessity  of  the  Mosaic 
Miracles. — Condition  of  the  Israelites  previous  to  the  Destruction  of  the 
Egyptians  in  the  Red  Sea. — Forty  Years'  Wandering  in  the  Desert. — Design 
of  the  Mosaic  Miracles 348 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

EVIDENCE    OF    PROPHECY. 

Oracles  of  Delphos  and  Dodona. — Prophecies  of  the  Bible  contrasted  with  other 
Prophecies. — Fulfilled  Prophecies. — The  Position  Prophecy  holds  in  the 
Bible. — End  secured  by  Prophecy. — Special  Minuteness  of  Detail  and  Accu- 
racy of  Fulfillment. — Prophecies  respecting  Babylon,  Tyre,  Egypt. — Three 
Sons  of  Noah. — Ishmael. — Abraham. — Jacob  and  his  Twelve  Sons. — Daniel. 
— Calmet. — Bishop  Mcllvaine 357 

CHAPTER  IX. 

PREDICTIONS  CONCERNING   CHRIST   AND   BY   CHRIST. 

Minuteness  of  Specification  in  the  Prophecies  concerning  Christ. — Daniel's  Proph- 
ecy of  Christ. — Zechariah's  Prediction  of  the  Thirty  Pieces  of  Silver. — Birth- 
place of  Christ  designated  by  Micah. — Predictions  of  Christ  by  Isaiah. — 
Predictions  of  our  Saviour  in  the  Psalms. — Christ's  Predictions  of  His 
Death,  His  Resurrection,  Rapid  Spread  of  the  Gospel  and  Persecutions  of  His 
Disciples,  the  Precise  Manner  of  Peter's  Death,  and  the  Destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem          376 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE    SUCCESS    OF   CHRISTIANITY   IN    THE    FIRST   CENTURY. 

Obstacles  the  Disciples  had  to  encounter. — Method  of  Christ's  Coming  opposed  to 
the  Desires  of  the  whole  Jewish  Nation. — Conduct  of  the  Jews  toward  Christ 
and  His  Disciples. — Mission  of  the  Twelve  Apostles. — Condition  of  the  World 
in  the  First  Century  of  the  Christian  Era. — Success  of  the  Apostles. — Testi- 
mony of  Pliny,  the  Roman  Governor. — Justin  Martyr. — Gibbon. — Sincerity 
of  Belief  and  Practice  in  the  Early  Christians 382 


xiv  CONTENTS  OF  BEV BALED   THEOLOGY. 

CHAPTER  XI. 

ADAPTATION   OP   THE   BIBLE   TO    HUMAN   NATURE    AND    THE   CONSCIENCE. 

PAGE 

Manner  in  which  the  Bible  should  be  approached. — Secret  Cause  of  Infidelity. — 
Bible  adapted  to  Human  Nature  as  a  Key  to  a  Lock. — Bible  meets  the  Demands 
of  the  Conscience. — Sanctions  imposed  by  the  Bible  on  the  Conscience. — How 
the  Conscience  is  treated  in  the  Bi"ble,  as  contrasted  with  other  Religions. — 
Bible  a  Guide  to  the  Conscience. — Revealer  of  New  Truths. — Bible  meets  the 
Natural  Sense  of  Justice. — It  furnishes  a  Perfect  System  of  Ethics. — Cannot  be 
imposed  upon. — It  takes  no  Undue  Advantage  of  the  Conscience. — Relation 
the  Bible  sustains  to  Science,  History,  and  Physical  Geography. — Bible  alone 
meets  the  Consciousness  of  Guilt 391 

CHAPTER  XII. 

ADAPTATION    OP    THE    BIBLE    TO    THE    AFFECTIONS    AND    THE    WILL. 

Popular  Language  of  the  Bible  respecting  the  Affections. — Philosophy  of  the  Temp- 
tation of  our  Firsi  Parents. — Predominance  of  the  Sensuous  Part  of  Man's 
Nature. — The  Bible  a  Regulating  Power  over  the  Affections. — Bible  adapted 
to  the  Social  and  Family  Relation,  to  the  Religious  Sensibilities,  to  Seasons 
of  Affliction  and  Adversity. — Adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the  Will. — Intimate 
Connection  of  the  Affections  with  the  Will. — Motives  presented  to  the  Will 
on  the  side  of  Fear  and  of  Hope. — The  Bible  a  Restraining  and  Energizing 
Power 409 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

ADAPTATION   OP   THE   BIBLE   TO   THE   INTELLECT    AND    TO    THE   IMAGINATION. 

Relation  of  the  Intellect  to  the  Truth. — New  Truths  communicated  by  the  Bible. — 
Number  and  Variety  of  the  Books  in  the  Bible. — Different  Styles  of  Biblical 
Composition. — Bible  reveals  the  best  kind  of  Knowledge. — Adaptation  of  the 
Bible  to  the  Imagination. — Stewart. — Bible  a  Regulating  Power  to  the 
Imagination. — It  gives  Perfect  Models  for  Imitation 419 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

MORAL    POWER   Of   CHRISTIANITY. 

Exclusive  Suprernacy  the  Bible  gives  to  God. — Christianity  a  Divine  Power. — 
Harmony  created  by  it  between  Reason  and  Faith. — The  Right  Relation  insti- 
tuted between  the  Sensibilities  and  Faith. — Alliance  of  the  Bible  with  the 
Spirit  of  God 430 

CHAPTER  XV. 

THE    HARMONY    OF   SCIENCE   AND    REVELATION, 

The  Value  of  a  True  Interpretation  of  the  Bible. — What  constitutes  the  Great  End 
of  Revelation. — Universal  and  Undeviating  Uniformity  of  Belief  upon  all  the 
Minutiae  of  the  Bible  impossible. — Distinction  between  the  Essential  and  the 
Unessential. — The  Use  of  Popular  Language  in  the  Bible. — No  Opposition 
between  Right  Science  and  Revelation. — The  Four  Fundamental  Truths  of 
Geology. — The  Mosaic  Narrative  of  the  Six  Days'  Creation. — E.  B.  Pusey. — 
Dr.  Buckland. — Chalmers. — Nichol. — Gaussen. — President  Green        .         .     438 


CONTENTS  OF  REVEALED    THEOLOGY.  xv 


CHAPTER  XVT. 

THE    UNITY    OP    THE    HUMAN    RACE. 

PAOB 

Earliest  Accounts  point  to  the  First  Period  of  Human  Existence  as  innocent  and 
happy. — Paul's  Mission  to  the  Athenians. — Central  Region  of  Asia  the  Cradle 
of  the  Human  Race. — No  Greater  Varieties  in  the  Human  Species  than  in  the 
Species  of  Animals. — The  Two  Great  Laws  of  Species. — Origin  of  the  Human 
Family  from  Adam. — Superfluity  of  Miracles  connected  with  many  Distinct 
Creations  of  Animals  and  Men. — Difference  between  Diversity  and  Mon- 
strosity.— Testimony  of  History. — Miraculous  Interposition  in  Combination 
with  Natural  Law. — Layard. — Confusion  of  Tongues  at  Babel       .        .        .  454 


CHAPTER   XVII. 

INTEGRITY  OF  THE  SACRED  CANON. 

Age  of  the  Apostles. — Testimony  of  Clement,  Hermas,  Ignatius,  Polycarp,  Justin 
Martyr,  Ireneeus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  Jerome,  and  Augustine. — 
Indirect  Testimony  of  the  Enemies  of  Christianity,  Celsus,  Porphyry,  Julian. 
— Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  indorsed  by  Christ.— Testimony  of  the  New 
Testament  and  Jewish  Writers. — Josephus. — Early  Christian  Fathers. — Prof. 
Sampson 477 

CHAPTER  XVIIL 

THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION   OF  THE    BIBLE. 

Distinction  between  General  and  Plenary  Inspiration. — Divine  and  Human  Element 
in  the  Bible. — Plenary  Inspiration  regards  the  Condition  of  the  Writing  rather 
than  the  Mind  of  the  Writer. — What  is  not  meant  by  plenary  inspiration. — 
Three  Forms  of  Error  into  which  the  Mind  falls  in  respect  to  the  Plenary 
Inspiration  of  the  Bible. — What  constitutes  a  Proof  of  Plenary  Inspiration. — 
Consideration  of  Objections  to  Plenary  Inspiration. — Testimony  of  Sacred 
Writers  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments. — Separate  Chains  of  Evidence  upon 
which  the  Inspiration  of  the  Bible  rests 487 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

HISTORIC    OUTLINE    OF    THE     OLD    TESTAMENT    THEOLOGY. 

Old  Testament  in  its  Revelation  of  God. — Mosaic  Dispensation. — Contrast 
between  the  Theism  of  the  Bible  and  the  Pagan  Polytheism. — Cudworth. — 
Deification  of  the  Creature  in  Ancient  Polytheism. — Alliance  of  Church  and 
State. — Paul's  Picture  of  Heathenism. — Design  of  the  Jewish  Theocracy  and 
Jewish  Ritual. — Principles  of  the  Hebrew  Polity 511 

CHAPTER  XX. 

HISTORIC   OUTLINE    OF  THE   NEW    TESTAMENT    THEOLOGY. 

The  Dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar. — Christianity. — Its  Relation  to  the  World. — Its 
Ultimate  Condition. — Croly. — Christianity  and  Paganism. — Antagonism  of 
Christianity  to  the  World. — Relation  sustained  to  the  Individual  and  to 
Society.— GilfilUn 526 


xvi  CONTENTS  OF  REVEALED    THEOLOGY 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

THE    DIFFICCLTIES   OF   SKEPTICISM. 

PAGE 

The  Bible  a  Religion  of  Facts. — Relation  of  the  Bible  to  Human  Reason. — In- 
fallibility of  Revelation. — The  two  great  Errors  of  Skepticism. — Diflficulties 
of  Skepticism:  1.  Degradation  of  Reason  in  its  Sphere.  2.  Makes  no  Pro- 
vision for  the  Highest  Want  of  the  Nature.  3.  Stumbles  upon  the  Incompre- 
hensible alike  of  Nature  and  of  Revelation.  4.  Removes  the  best  Standard 
of  Virtue.     5.  Has  no  Unity  of  Belief 537 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

THE    UNREASONABLEJfESS   OF    SKEPTICISM. 

Skepticism  cannot  improve  upon  the  Morality  of  the  Bible. — Objections  of  the 
Skeptic  frivolous  and  inconsistent. — The  Skeptic  cannot  prove  any  of  the 
Facts  of  the  Bible  untrue. — Twofold  Class  of  Facts  in  the  Bible,  both  mutually 
sustaining  each  other. — Skepticism  a  System  of  Doubt,  and  not  of  Evidence  .  546 

INDEX  TO  AUTHORS  ...  555 


NATURAL  THEOLOGY. 


NATURAL  THEOLOGY. 


CHAPTER   I. 

EFFICIENT  CAUSATION,  AND  FINAL  CAUSATION. 

The  reasoning  from  eflect  to  cause  has  two  leading  divi- 
sions : — first,  that  kind  of  argument  which  is  based  upon 
efiicient  causation;  secondly,  that  which  is  based  upon  final 
causation.  Eflacient  causation  is  where  the  effect  or  result 
is  of  such  a  nature  that  we  can  attribute  it  in  no  sense  to  any 
other  being  than  the  First  Cause,  or  God.  Final  causation 
is  reasoning  from  the  character  of  the  effect,  or  result,  to  God. 
The  former  rests  upon  the  proof  that  such  is  the  effect,  or 
result,  that  we  know  of  no  other  cause  but  the  First  Cause, 
or  God.  We  cannot  suppose  any  intermediate,  or  what  is 
called  secondary,  cause.  The  latter  relies  for  the  proof  of 
God  upon  the  design,  adaptation,  or  intelligence  displayed 
in  the  effect  or  result.  The  one  reasons  from  nature  directly 
up  to  nature's  God,  or  from  effects  otherwise  inexplicable  to 
the  First  Cause  that  solves  all  difficulties ;  the  other  relies 
upon  the  character  of  those  effects  to  show  an  infinitely 
intellio^ent  and  desio-nins:  cause. 

We  classify  all  things  under  two  great  divisions,  mind  and 
matter.  One  has  thought,  perception,  sensibility  to  emotions 
of  joy  or  grief,  pleasure  or  pain,  love  or  hatred,  and,  above 
all,  the  great  attribute  of  will,  or  instinct,  Avhich  decides  all 
action  or  controls  all  conduct.  The  other  substance  we  call 
matter,  which  has  length  and  breadth,  form  and  divisibility. 
All  matter  that  comes  under  the  inspection  of  the  senses 
has  also  color  and  weight.  The  great  instrument  by  which 
we  attain  to  the  knowledge  of  immaterial  substances  is  pecu- 

(19) 


20  EFFICIENT    CAUSATION, 

liarly  the  consciousness;  while  the  senses  bring  us  directly 
into  contact  with  matter,  and  afford  us  a  certain  knowledge 
of  it.  Observe,  then,  that  man,  compounded  of  two  directly 
opposite  substances,  perfectly  distinct  from  each  other,  yet 
linked  together  by  the  mysterious  cord  of  animal  life,  comes 
for  the  first  time  into  existence.  What  brought  man  thus 
compounded  into  being?  What  introduced  the  first  man 
into  the  world  ?  What  combined  .together  two  substances 
so  foreign  from  each  other  ?  Let  us  suppose,  with  the  atheist, 
that  some  peculiar  modification  of  matter  brought  him  into 
being,  some  fortunate  position  of  particles,  some  wonderful 
combination  of  atoms  under  the  mysterious  agency  of  chemi- 
cal or  mechanical  law.  Incredible  as  this  is,  let  us,  for  argu- 
ment's sake,  admit  it.  But  what  are  we  to  do  with  the  mind 
of  man?  How  came  that  into  being?  Is  it  not  an  axiom 
that  no  substance  can  impart  that  which  it  has  not?  Matter 
is  not  mind, — how  can  it  give  it  ?  JVIaterial  atoms  have  not 
thought,  will,  perception,  and  feeling.  We  do  not  attach 
the  ideas  of  weight,  color,  length  and  breadth,  form  and 
divisibility,  to  mind ;  and  yet  that  which  has  not  intelligence, 
which  has  none  of  the  properties  of  mind,  did  produce 
thought,  and,  more  than  all,  impart  a  moral  nature,  a  sense 
of  accountability  and  of  free  agency  !  Are  we  not  intuitively 
struck  with  the  absurdity  of  such  a  supposition?  Even  if 
matter  had  in  itself  an  efficient  power  of  producing,  without  a 
First  Cause,  every  modification  of  matter  and  every  diversity 
of  mechanism,  yet  it  cannot  produce  mind;  it  cannot  be  the 
architect  of  thought,  will,  perception,  a  moral  sense,  or  free 
agency.  Who  can  conceive  of  matter  engendering,  by  its  own 
inherent  power,  the  conscience,  the  perception,  and  feeling  of 
right  and  wrong?  If  one  infinite  mind  was  not  the  author 
of  the  human  mind,  then  the  conclusion  must  be  that  mind 
owed  its  parentage  to  matter,  to  a  substance  w^hose  exclusive 
properties  are  extension,  weight,  form,  divisibility,  and  color. 
Before  the  atheist  can  give  the  least  plausibility  to  his 
theories,  he  must  deny  the  existence  of  spirit,  and  of  all 
things  immaterial. 

Let  us,  then,  see  if,  upon  the  theory  of  the  atheistic  mate- 


A.\W    FINAL    CAUSATION.  21 

rialist,  there  is  any  virtue  in  the  argument  that  matter  was 
the  sole  cause  of  the  human  body.  Imagine,  now,  that 
thought,  feeling,  will,  perception,  and  reason  are  only  refined 
modifications  of  matter ;  simply  the  subtile  phenomena  of 
materialism.  What  is  the  question  to  be  solved  ?  Simply 
this  :  can  any  or  all  of  the  known  or  supposed  laws  of  matter 
account  for  the  origin  of  the  human  body  and  mind?  Most 
certainly  not.  Material  laws  are  simply  the  mode  under  which 
material  phenomena  develop  themselves.  Thus,  we  have 
the  general  law  of  gravity,  or  attraction;  mechanical  law, 
which  relates  to  position  and  direction  ;  chemical  law,  which 
relates  to  affinity  and  combination.  Here  are  material  atoms, 
or  inorganic  particles.  Can  we  imagine  any  juxtaposition, 
or  combination,  or  attraction  of  atoms  to  come  together  and 
form  the  mysterious  framework  of  the  human  system  ?  Re- 
member, we  cannot  ascribe  intelligence  to  atoms  of  inorganic 
matter:  we  give  to  them  their  appropriate  laws  ;  but  do  they 
or  can  they  produce  the  human  organism?  Who  can  con- 
ceive of  blind,  unconscious  particles  of  matter  jostling  to- 
gether a  human  frame,  bone,  muscle,  heart,  blood,  veins, 
arteries,  hands,  eyes,  ears,  feet,  and  all  in  one  harmonious 
system,  all  in  due  proportion,  with  no  superabundance  and 
no  defect?  We  must  disown  our  own  consciousness  and 
the  first  principles  of  reason,  before  we  can  harbor  such 
a  thought.  Remember,  we  have  inorganic  particles  to 
produce  a  perfect,  living  organism.  Denying  an  infinite 
intelligence  to  fashion  the  body,  our  only  resort  is  unintelli- 
gent atoms.  By  tlie  law  of  gravity  we  suppose  worlds  are 
kept  in  motion,  and  matter  is  attracted  to  matter;  by  me- 
chanical law  we  give  position  and  direction  to  different  sub- 
stances ;  by  chemical  law^  we  secure  affinit}',  and  the  intimate 
combination  of  elements  together.  But  can  one  or  all  of 
these  law^s  of  inorganic  substances  account  for  the  living  bod^^ 
of  man  ?  Xo.  We  trace  their  operation  out,  and  we  find 
they  have  their  own  peculiar  sphere.  Neither  moving  worlds 
nor  moving  atoms  can  engender  living  bodies.  No  chemical 
law  can  give  birth  to  the  lowest  organism.  The  sphere  of 
chemical  law  is  as  distinct  from  the  vital  principle  of  living 


22  EFFICIENT   CAUSATION, 

organisms  as  the  act  of  volition  from  a  stone.  The  first  man 
is  an  effect,  a  result  of  something;  but  that  something  cannot 
be  floating  atoms  of  matter,  or  any  conceivable  mechanical, 
chemical,  or  gravitating  law.  We  cannot  with  sane  minds 
believe  in  what  we  never  have  seen  done  nor  can  show  can 
be  done.  Thus,  whether  we  conceive  of  man  as  only  mate- 
rial, or  both  material  and  immaterial,  we  know  that  no  law 
of  gravity,  no  mechanical  force,  and  no  chemical  affinity  can 
be  a  sufficient  reason,  or  any  reason  whatever,  for  the  living 
organism.  We  know  that  no  jumbling  together  of  atoms,  no 
chance  combination  of  particles,  no  blind  floating  of  lifeless 
substances  could  engender  the  human  system.  But  more 
than  this, — we  know  that  the  principle  that  gives  vitality  to 
the  living  body  of  man  is  constantly  at  war  w^ith  the  laws  of 
inorganic  substances.  Man  only  lives  by  holding  in  inces- 
sant check  those  inorganic  laws  that  rapidly,  when  they  have 
the  mastery,  reduce  the  system  to  the  dust  of  the  ground. 
Who  has  not  noticed  how  soon,  wdien  the  vital  laws  suspend 
their  action,  the  body  decomposes?  The  wear  of  the 
elements,  the  friction  of  the  human  machinery,  the  agency 
of  chemical  affinities,  all  combine  to  destroy  the  human  body. 
But  the  vital  law  of  all  living  organisms  holds  all  other  laws 
in  abeyance;  bat  when  death  comes,  and  the  principle  of 
vitality  no  longer  exists,  then  these  inorganic  laws  reduce  to 
dust  the  human  frame.  How"  great,  then,  the  absurdity  of 
attributing  to  any  inorganic  law,  or  all  combined,  the  living 
body  of  man!  We  then  come  to  the  conclusion  that,  if  man 
has  had  a  beginning,  we  can  find  no  cause  for  it  in  nature: 
we  must  find  that  cause  in  God. 

"Without  going  into  any  subtilities,"  says  Sir  John  Her- 
schel,  "I  may  at  least  be  allowed  to  suggest  that  it  is  at  least 
high  time  that  philosophers,  both  physical  and  others,  should 
come  to  some  nearer  agreement  than  seems  to  prevail  as  to 
the  meaning  they  intend  to  convey  in  speaking  of  causes  and 
causation.  On  the  one  hand,  we  are  told  that  the  grand  ob- 
ject of  physical  inquiry  is  to  explain  the  nature  of  phenomena 
by  referring  them  to  the  causes ;  on  the  other,  that  the  in- 
quiry into  causes   is  altogether  vain    and   futile,  and  that 


AND   FINAL    CAUSATION.  23 

science  has  no  concern  but  with  tlie  discovery  of  huvs. 
Which  of  them  is  the  truth?  Or  are  both  views  of  the 
matter  true  on  a  ditferent  interpretation  of  the  terms? 
Whichever  view  we  may  take,  or  whichever  interpretation 
we  may  adopt,  there  is  one  thing  certain — the  extreme  in- 
convenience of  such  a  state  of  hmguage.  This  can  only  be 
reformed  bj'-  a  careful  analysis  of  the  widest  of  all  human 
generalizations,  disentangling  from  one  another  the  innu- 
merable shades  of  meaning  which  have  got  confounded 
together  in  its  progress,  and  establishing  among  them  a 
rational  classification  and  nomenclature.  Until  this  be  done, 
we  cannot  be  sure  that  by  the  relation  of  cause  and  ciiect 
one  and  the  same  kind  of  relation  is  understood." 

The  half-atheistic  theory  of  gradual  development  to  ac- 
count for  the  commencement  of  the  human  race,  is  as  much 
opposed  to  true  science  as  it  is  to  the  express  declarations  of 
Scripture.  Consequently  we  are  shut  up  to  the  only  possi- 
ble alternative  to  account  for  the  origin  of  man,  even  the 
direct  and  miraculous  power  of  God.  But  the  form  of  argu- 
ment to  prove  the  existence  of  God  the  most  impressive,  is 
that  founded  upon  design  and  adaptation.  This  comes  more 
properly  under  the  name  of  final  causation.  But  if  the 
argument  of  final  causation  is  more  impressive,  and  of  far 
wider  application,  it  may  be  doubted  if  it  is  as  direct  and 
positive  as  the  argument  of  efficient  causation.  The  atheis- 
tical mind  will  often  confound  the  reasoning  of  design  and 
adaptation  to  prove  the  existence  of  God  with  the  operation 
ot  natural  law.  Under  the  vao-ue  lano-uao-e  of  laws  of  nature 
there  will  be  lost  all  true  ideas  of  a  personal  God,  and  thus 
these  very  evidences  of  contrivance  and  adaptation,  that 
should  lead  directlj'  to  the  great  First  Cause,  are  perverted 
by  the  wrong  use  of  laws  of  nature.  When  the  theist,  filled 
with  admiration  in  the  contemplation  of  a  wonder-working 
God,  would  point  to  the  diversified  evidences  of  design,  the 
skeptic  shuts  out  the  conviction  of  God  from  his  mind  by 
worshiping  law  in  his  place.  Consequently  to  give  the 
highest  logical  accuracy  as  directness  to  the  argument  for  a 
God,  it  is  necessarv  to  2:0  back  to  the  commencement  of  the 


24  EFFICIENT  CAUSATION, 

human  race,  and  of  the  varied  species  of  animate  creation, 
when  the  great  law  of  production,  or  the  generation  of  ani- 
mals, had  no  existence.  Here  we  say  to  the  skeptic,  Much 
as  you  may  defy  law,  you  cannot  bring  in  law  to  account  for 
the  origin  of  man,  and  quadrupeds,  reptiles,  birds,  and  the 
fishy  tribes.  Before  these  living  creatures  had  an  existence, 
where  was  the  law  of  reproduction  ?  Where  was  the  law  of 
propagating  species  before  species  had  any  being?  To  speak 
of  the  animate  world  before  its  existence  is  the  greatest  of 
absurdities.  It  is  the  same  as  to  say,  there  is  a  uniform  mode 
or  principle  of  reproduction,  of  growth,  and  life,  before  even 
generation,  growth,  and  life  had  an  existence.  Thus,  imme- 
diately when  we  come  to  the  first  links  of  each  chain  that 
represents  the  difierent  species  of  animals,  we  are  compelled 
to  have  recourse  to  an  infinitely  intelligent  and  powerful 
being  as  their  sole  and  only  adequate  cause.  The  laws  of 
nature  in  respect  to  animals  can  have  no  actual  existence 
until  the  difl:erent  species  of  animals  are  created.  By  con- 
founding cause  and  effect  with  the  general  phenomena  of  the 
law  of  production,  the  author  of  the  "Vestiges  of  Creation" 
fell  into  the  blunder  of  gradual  development.  He  did  not 
consider  that  the  human  mind,  dissatisfied  with  the  vague 
abstraction  of  general  law,  demanded  something  better  to 
account  for  the  origin  of  man  and  the  different  species  of 
animals.  So  also  Spinoza,  by  making  no  distinction  between 
physical  causation  and  mental  causation,  between  material 
and  immaterial  substances,  the  laws  of  body  and  the  laws  of 
thought  and  will,  constructed  a  theory  whose  iron  fatalism 
destroyed  alike  all  virtue  and  all  freedom, — a  theory  where 
God  becomes  nature,  and  both  are  bound  together  with  the 
chain  of  an  irresistible  necessity.  So  Hume,  by  overlooking 
the  distinction  of  substances  and  their  properties  or  modes 
of  action, — mental  causation  and  mental  effects, — overturned 
the  certainty  of  all  human  knowledge,  and  introduced  a 
state  of  unlimited  doubt.  The  pantheism  of  Spinoza  was 
fatalism;  the  skepticism  of  Hume,  endless  uncertainty.  So 
also  the  atheist,  by  making  cause  and  existence  identical, 
and  giving  too  wide  a  meaning  to  the  axiom  of  cause  and 


AXD   FINAL    CAUSATION.  25 

effect,  reduces  the  theist  to  the  alternative  of  admitting 
either  that  God  had  a  cause,  or  that  the  earth  was  uncaused. 
Consequently  we  see  how  necessary  is  correct  reasoning 
upon  cause  and  effect.  The  argument  from  design,  as  well 
as  that  from  efficient  causation,  is  deeply  affected  h\  a  cor- 
rect understanding  of  cause  and  effect,  of  laws  mental  and 
material,  and  what  are  matters  of  fact  in  distinction  from 
the  abstract  relation  of  ideas. 

What  is  the  common  idea  of  cause  with  all  persons  univer- 
sall}'?  Is  it  not  that  which  produces  effects?  Is  not  effi- 
ciency, or  power  of  some  sort,  always  included  in  the  idea  of 
a  cause?  ^  A  cause,  then,  is  a  substance,  material  or  mental, 
that  produces  effects.  Can  we  have  the  idea  of  cause  and 
not  also  of  effect  with  it?  Is  not  effect  the  necessary  and 
invariable  consequent  of  cause?  Take  away  the  idea  of  effect 
from  cause,  and  can  we  have  any  idea  of  cause?  Certainly 
not.  A  cause  is  that  which  causes,  produces,  or  influences. 
Cause,  therefore,  must  with  it  comprehend  power.  Can 
there  be  an  effect  and  no  power  to  produce  it?  Impossible! 
For  what  is  an  effect  unless  it  implies  the  result  of  action, 
or  change  of  some  sort  ?  If  the  idea  of  power  could  be  sepa- 
rated from  cause,  then  we  could  separate  cause  and  effect ; 
for  if  cause  has  no  power,  then  effect  has  no  cause,  for  all 
action,  motion,  or  change  must  imply  a  power  to  produce 
such  action,  motion,  or  change.  AVe  can  no  more  divorce 
power  from  cause  than  we  can  cause  from  effect.  But  in 
what  sense  does  cause  implj^  power?  Exclusively  in  the 
sense  of  power  in  action,  for  cause  and  power  passive,  or  not 
put  forth,  is  a  contradiction  in  terms.  This  is  our  first  idea 
of  cause.  What  is  our  second  idea  of  cause?  It  is,  that 
cause  not  only  includes  power  in  action,  but  substance  for 
existence.  We  know  of  only  two  perfectly  distinct  kinds 
of  substances:  one  we  call  mind,  the  other  body;  one  is 
spiritual,  the  other  material.  When  we  speak  of  causes  in 
the  world  of  matter,  we  mean  physical  causes;  in  the  world 
of  mind,  mental  or  spiritual  causes ;  and  both  include  the 
two  fundamental  ideas  of  power  and  substance.  We  come, 
then,  to  consider  if  cause  and  existence  are  identical  propo- 


26  EFFICIENT  CAUSATION, 

sltioiis,  or  synonymous  terms.  Existence  and  substance  are 
identical,  for  there  can  be  no  substance  without  existence, 
and  no  existence  without  substance.  We  cannot  speak  of 
notliing  existing,  except  as  a  figure  of  speech.  We  can  have 
no  idea  of  existence  divorced  from  substance,  and  its  proper- 
ties divorced  from  existence.  But  is  existence  in  the  same 
manner  identical  with  cause  ?  Can  existence  never  be  spoken 
of  without  the  idea  of  cause  ?  Upon  a  correct  solution  of  this 
question  depends  essentially  the  strength  of  the  argument  for 
the  existence  of  God.  It  has  been  seen  that  cause  is  ahvays 
that  wliich  produces  ;  that  it  always  includes  power  in  action 
of  some  sort:  not  power  passive,  but  power  leading  to 
effects,  movements,  or  changes.  Now,  do  we  not  often  have 
the  idea  of  substance  passive  in  a  quiescent  state,  not  acting? 
Certainly  no  idea  is  more  uniformly  familiar  to  the  mind ; 
but  substance  is  synonymous  with  existence :  then  of  conrsc 
there  can  be  the  idea  of  existence  without  action,  or  causa- 
tion. While  a  cause  uniformly  implies  existence,  existence 
does  not  uniformly  imply  a  cause.  One  is  general,  the  other 
specific.  One  alwa^-s  comprehends  substance,  the  other  sub- 
stance in  action.  Thus  we  come  to  the  conclusion  that,  while 
cause  always  implies  substance,  energizing  or  producing 
effects,  existence  may  or  may  not  include  substance,  ener- 
o-izino;  or  causino-  effects;  and  therefore  that  it  is  stretchinor 
the  axiom  too  far  to  say  that  because  every  effect  must  have 
a  cause,  therefore  all  substance  or  existence  must  have  a 
cause.  The  atheist,  misusing  this  axiom,  tells  ns  that  since 
every  effect  must  have  a  cause,  and  every  cause  a  substance, 
therefore  there  is  an  endless  series  of  causes  and  effects,  and 
consequently  that  God  himself  has  a  cause,  and  therefore 
there  is  no  First  Cause.  If  the  mind,  revolting  from  such  a 
c(^nclnsion,  denies  the  axiom  that  every  effect  must  have  a 
cause,  then  the  atheist  turns  to  this  earth,  and  asks  if  the 
world  itself  is  not  uncaused  and  existing  from  eternity,  since 
there  are  some  effects  without  a  cause.  How  is  the  theist  to 
extricate  himself  from  this  dilemma  ?  Simply  b}-  showing  that 
the  axiom,  that  every  effect  must  have  a  cause,  is  restricted 
exclusively  to  substances   energizing,  or  producing  effects; 


AiVD   FINAL   causation:  27 

that  it  has  rehitioii  to  power  in  action,  not  passive  flower;  to  an 
existence  that  produces  changes,  not  an  existence  not  caused. 
Thus,  viewing  substance  without  movement,  change,  or  ac- 
tion, with  no  previous  knowledge  of  that  substance  or  how 
it  came  into  existence,  we  cannot  say  that  it  had  a  cause  ;  but 
no  sooner  do  we  see  power  operating  in  change  or  movement 
than  we  say  at  once  there  is  an  effect,  and  therefore  a  cause. 
Is  it  not,  then,  admitted  that  existence  does  not  necessarily 
or  inevitably  imply  a  cause?  Then  God,  who  is  an  ex- 
istence, is  not  an  effect  from  a  pre-existing  cause,  God  is 
uncaused,  self-existing,  the  great  First  Cause  and  effect. 
From  within  himself  there  is  a  sufficient  cause  for  all  his 
worlds.  In  his  o^x\^  nature,  not  out  of  it,  there  dwells  the 
misrhtv  fountain  of  cause  and  effect.  In  himself  reside  in- 
finite  knowledge  and  power.  Thus,  by  limiting  a  general 
axiom  to  its  peculiar  sphere,  do  we  disentangle  our  minds  of 
that  web  of  sophistry  that  leads  to  fatalism  and  the  denial  of 
a  personal,  uncaused  God.  "  Matter,  as  an  unformed  mass," 
says  Brown,  "could  not,  of  itself,  have  suggested  the  notion 
of  a  Creator,  since  in  every  hypothesis  something  material  or 
mental  must  have  existed  uncaused,  and  mere  existence, 
therefore,  is  not  necessarily  a  mark  of  previous  causation, 
unless  we  take  for  granted  an  infinite  series  of  causes." 

Let  us  examine  the  distinction  between  physical  causes 
and  mental  causes,  and  get  the  essential  idea  of  the  two. 
When  we  speak  of  causes  in  the  w^orld  of  matter,  what  do  we 
mean  ?  Do  we  mean  that  simple  uncompounded  substances,  or 
substances  apart  from  other  substances,  can  produce  effects  ? 
Then  matter  is  not  essentially  passive  ;  like  volition,  it  is  self- 
active  :  certainly  this  is  not  meant  by  physical  causation.  We 
mean  by  physical  causation  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect 
under  certain  prescribed  conditions.  Thus,  there  must  be 
two  or  more  substances  to  produce  effects,  and  then  a  certain 
relation  of  those  substances  to  each  other.  In  other  words, 
cause  and  effect  can  only  exist  in  physical  substances  when 
there  is  more  than  one  substance,  and  then  under  a  certain 
prescribed  order  or  law,  or  relation  of  these  substances  to 
each  other.     We  must  combiiT^  the  two,  or  there  is  no  effect. 


28  EFFICIENT   CAUSATION, 

We  can  dissolve  salt  in  water,  but  not  glass.  We  can  mingle 
together  milk  and  water,  but  not  oil  and  water.  Thus,  we 
see  in  all  material  substances  mechanical  laws  and  chemical 
laws,  and  to  produce  effects  there  must  be  two  or  more  sub- 
stances, and  then  a  right  adjustment  of  those  substances. 
Consequently  all  action  in  matter  comes  from  wnthout ;  all 
effects  are  ab  extra.  Matter  itself  is  passive,  and  must  be 
moved  upon.  Alone  it  never  changes,  never  moves,  never 
acts.  We  do  not  discuss  the  nature  of  second  causes,  but 
simply  their  mode  of  manifestation.  We  do  not  define  tlie 
phenomena  of  physical  causes,  but  exhibit  them  as  they  ap- 
pear to  all  minds.  Matter  itself  is  essentially  passive.  All 
effect,  all  action,  is  from  without,  not  within;  therefore 
matter  has  no  intelligence,  no  freedom,  no  accountability. 
What,  now,  is  mental  causation?  Mental  causes  differ  as 
widely  from  physical  causes  as  the  mind  itself  from  matter. 
The  mind  is  a  unit,  a  person,  a  substance  indivisible,  endowed 
with  will,  which  is  self-active.  Self  is  the  invariable  attendant 
upon  mind,  a  simple,  pure  idea  of  consciousness,  self-evident 
and  intuitive.  Thus,  the  idea  of  person,  and  that  of  self,  go 
together.  Every  volition  of  mind,  every  perception  of  the 
senses,  every  feeling  of  the  heart,  every  emotion  of  sensibility, 
carries  with  it  the  consciousness  of  self,  of  a  person,  of  me.,  a 
free  agent.  Thus,  we  see  a  wide  distinction  between  person 
and  thing  :  a  person  is  individual ;  a  thing,  general ;  a  person 
is  unity;  a  thing,  complexity.  One  is  indivisible,  the  other 
divisible  ;  one  self-active,  the  other  acted  upon  ;  one  embodies 
essential  freedom,  the  other  uniform  necessity.  A  thing  pro- 
duces effects  from  without;  a  person,  from  within.  One  is 
caused,  the  other  self  caused.  One  is  irresponsible,  the  other 
accountable.  Thus,  a  person  has  a  kingl}-  will,  free  to  act  right 
and  wrong,  moving  within  itself,  making  tributary  to  it  as 
instruments  the  diversified  objects  of  sense;  but  a  thing  is 
irresistibly  bound  to  the  law  of  necessity;  it  cannot  act  ex- 
cept in  connection  with  another  substance,  and  then  only  in 
accordance  with  some  invariable  law  of  order  or  proportion  : 
doubly  enchained  in  itself,  it  is  essentially  passive.  Thus 
we  see  how  different  are  the  causes  of  the  physical  and  of  the 


AND   FINAL    CAUSATION.  29 

material  world, — how  unlike  are  each  in  their  action.  Here 
it  is,  by  compounding  mental  causes  and  physical  causes 
together,  we  see  the  error  of  the  extreme  necessarians,  and 
by  overlooking  physical  causes,  or  the  great  law  of  cause  and 
etfect,  in  mind  as  in  matter,  we  see  the  difficulties  of  the  ex- 
treme libertarians.  The  former,  by  a  mode  of  reasoning- 
adapted  only  to  physical  causes,  make  even  the  will  forced, 
and  a  compulsory  state  of  the  volitions,  thus  virtually  leading 
to  the  ruin  of  all  true  liberty ;  while  the  latter,  denying 
cause  and  effect  in  the  mental  world  in  relation  to  the  will, 
not  only  war  against  the  clearest  axiom  of  consciousness,  but 
remove  away  all  certaintj'  of  human  action,  all  foundation 
for  character,  and  the  only  principle  by  which  we  can  possiblj* 
judge  of  human  or  divine  conduct.  If  there  is  no  great  law 
of  causality  in  the  mental  world,  then  consciousness  and  the 
senses  falsify  their  trust ;  liberty  even  ceases  to  be  true 
liberty,  and  becomes  a  variable,  lawless  liberty,  where  un- 
limited fickleness  marks  all  character,  and  eternal  uncertainty 
all  action.  The  laws  of  the  mental  world  cease  to  have  any 
meaning,  and  endless  doubt  rests.upon  every  anticipation  of 
human  or  divine  volition.  But  it  is  equally  hazardous  not  to 
draw  the  line  of  separation  heaven-wide  between  physical 
and  mental  causes.  If  we  borrow  our  reasoning  upon  mental 
causes  from  any  physical  analogy,  we  are  inevitably  forced 
over  the  precipice  of  a  relentless  necessity.  We  may  cover 
up  our  language  with  ever  so  many  smooth  names,  but  we 
shall  be  compelled  either  to  contradict  over  and  over  again 
ourselves,  or,  if  consistent,  there  can  be  no  alternative  but  the 
fatalism  of  Fichte  or  Spinoza.  AVe  are  not  safe  for  a  moment 
if  we  lose  the  idea  that  the  mind  acts  from  within,  while  the 
body  from  without ;  that  in  the  will  cause  and  effect  are  ab 
intra,  while  in  matter  ab  extra;  the  one  self-active,  the  other 
acted  upon.  The  only  idea  of  power  with  mind  is  internal, 
while  with  the  body  it  is  external.  Consequently  physical 
and  mental  causation  are  distinct  altogether.  Not  more  wide 
apart  is  the  substance  of  matter  from  mind,  than  is  the  law  of 
causality  that  reigns  in  both.  Let  the  necessarian  purge  his 
mind    of  physical    causes    when  he   enters   the    mysterious 


30  EFFICIENT   CAUSATION, 

temple  of  human  thought  and  volition.  Let  him  disentangle 
himself  of  the  ambiguous  reasoning  about  the  strongest  mo- 
tive. It  is  the  man  that  determines  the  motive,  vastly  more 
than  the  motive  the  man.  And  let  the  extreme  libertarian 
remember  that  the  law  of  causality  exists  in  the  world  of 
matter  and  of  mind;  that  in  tlie  mind  it  exists  in  perfect 
consistency  with  human  freedom;  that  consciousness  and  the 
senses  confirm  this  law,  and  that  without  it  all  things  would 
be  afloat,  even  as  they  would  be  did  it  not  exist  in  the  mate- 
rial world.  Having  now  considered  the  distinction  between 
physical  and  mental  causes,  let  the  person  who  would  lose 
sight  of  God  in  second  causes,  or  deny  them,  consider  the 
language  of  Lord  Bacon  : 

"  For  certain  it  is  that  God  worketh  nothing  in  nature  but 
by  second  causes;  and  if  they  would  have  it  otherwise  be- 
lieved, it  is  by  mere  imposture,  as  it  were  in  favor  toward 
God  and  nothing  else,  but  to  ofier  to  the  author  of  truth  the 
unclean  sacrifice  of  a  lie.  But  further,  it  is  an  absurd  truth, 
and  a  conclusion  of  experience,  that  a  little  or  superficial 
knowledge  of  philosophy  may  incline  the  man  to  atheism; 
but  a  further  proceeding  therein  doth  bring  the  mind  back 
again  to  religion  ;  for  in  the  entrance  of  philosophy,  when 
the  second  causes,  which  are  next  unto  the  senses,  do  offer 
themselves  to  the  mind  of  man,  if  it  dwell  and  sta^-,  then  it 
may  include  some  oblivion  of  the  highest  cause;  but  when  a 
man  passeth  on  farther  and  seeth  the  dependence  of  causes 
and  the  works  of  Providence,  then,  according  to  the  allegory 
of  the  poets,  he  will  easily  believe  that  the  highest  link 
of  nature's  chain  must  needs  be  tied  to  the  foot  of  Jupiter's 
chair." 

It  has  therefore  been  seen  that  God  could  not  have  a  prior 
cause,  because  existence  does  not  necessarily  imply  a  cause; 
because,  when  we  trace  back  ever  so  far  cause  and  effect,  we 
reach  at  last  the  first  cause,  and  the  only  sufficient  cause; 
and  that  there  we  must  stop,  because  in  God  cause  and  effect 
are  self-existing,  and  that  consequently  there  can  be  no  infi- 
nite series  of  causes.  Here  we  feel  that  the  existence  of  God 
is  placed  upon  an  immovable  foundation.  When  then  we  come 


A.\W   FIXAL    CAUSATION.  31 

to  reason  upon  final  causes,  the  adjustment  of  general  laws,  the 
adaptation  of  means  to  an  end,  and  all  the  evidences  of  design 
shown  in  the  works  of  nature,  we  can  see  far  more  clearly 
than  before  the  varied  and  wonderful  proofs  of  the  being  of 
God;  we  extricate  ourselves  from  all  the  sophistry  disguised 
under  the  unmeaning  language  of  laws  of  nature,  and  that 
pantheism  that  confounds  God  and  nature  together;  but 
especially  do  we  relieve  ourselves  of  the  metaphysical  sub- 
tilities  comprehended  in  an  infinite  series  of  causes  directly 
leading  to  the  deification  of  the  powers  of  nature,  and  the 
denial  of  all  true  freedom  of  will. 

Unsurpassed  as  is  the  reasoning  of  Paley  upon  the  evi- 
dences of  contrivance  in  nature,  and  the  clearness  of  all  his 
proofs  of  intelligence  in  the  construction  of  the  world,  yet 
his  admirable  work  upon  final  causes  and  design  evinced  in 
this  world  cannot  clearly  combat  the  profound  subtilitv  of 
German  infidelity,  and  all  the  atheistical  sophistry  disguised 
under  the  lano-uasre  of  laws  of  natui-e  and  an  infinite  series 
of  causes.  To  give  the  highest  efiect  to  all  reasoning  upon 
final  causes,  it  is  very  important  to  show  efficient  causation 
in  the  works  of  nature  from  God,  when  in  no  sense  general 
law  in  respect  to  that  causation  could  have  an  existence. 
Thus  removed  from  the  sphere  of  law,  eflicicnt  causation 
leads  directly,  without  any  intermediate  agency,  to  the  First 
Cause.  God,  then,  being  clearly  demonstrated  by  the  most 
convincing  induction,  all  other  proofs  from  final  causes,  from 
the  laws  of  nature,  or  the  adaptation  of  means  to  an  end, 
come  clothed  with  far  greater  power  to  the  mind.  This  is 
easily  seen  when  there  is  the  direct  suspension  of  some  law 
of  nature,  as  in  the  case  of  miracles.  How  irresistibly  is 
the  mind  led  to  the  acknowledgment  of  God!  IIow  strik- 
ing, how  direct  is  the  proof  of  divine  agency  !  Should  some 
man,  as  in  the  time  of  Christ,  be  raised  from  the  dead,  or 
walk,  as  our  Saviour  did,  upon  the  waves  of  the  sea,  how 
convincing  would  be  the  immediate  power  of  God!  Thus 
the  mind  that  so  unreasonably  confounds  God  with  nature, 
and  the  Deity  with  his  laws,  is  forced,  however  reluctant,  to 
confess  the  beinsf  of  God.      Because  efficient  causation   in 


32       EFFICIENT  CAUSATION,  AND  FINAL   CAUSATION. 

the  origin  of  man  and  the  brutes  partakes  so  clearly  of  the 
character  of  miracle,  where  no  known  law  and  no  second 
causes  have  any  existence,  we  see  how  irresistibly  the 
atheism  embodied  in  the  wrong  idea  of  general  laws  of  an 
infinite  series  of  causes  is  swept  away.  We  see  how  plainly 
an  infinite  God  is  seated  upon  the  throne  of  the  universe, 
revealing  himself  directly  in  creation  and  all  miracles,  and 
indirectly,  but  no  less  certainly,  in  the  phenomena  of  general 
laws,  their  adjustment  together,  and  the  adaptation  of  means 
to  an  end. 

"It  is  no  doubtful  inference,"  says  Francis  Bowen,  "no 
long  and  tedious  process  of  reasoning,  which  connects  all 
events  in  the  history  of  the  universe  with  the  being  and 
attributes  of  God.  The  conclusion  is  so  obvious,  the  con- 
nection so  close  and  striking,  that  it  is  difficult  to  believe 
that  any  mind  not  willfully  obtuse,  and  not  perverted  by 
logical  subtilities  and  metaphysical  abstractions,  ever  failed 
to  conceive  it  with  perfect  trust  at  first  sight." 


CHAPTER   II. 

WHAT    ARE    MATTERS    OF   FACT  ? 

Matters  of  fact  may  be  dietinguished  into  things  which 
exist  and  events  which  take  place.  Thus  the  earth  is  a 
matter  of  fact,  and  its  movement  is  equally  so. 

What  are  matters  of  fact  ? 

All  material  things,  and  all  events  in  connection  with 
them,  must  he  classed  among  matters  of  fact.  But  the  ques- 
tion is.  Are  matters  of  fact  exclusively  confined  to  objects 
of  sense  and  their  changes,  or  can  matters  of  fact  have  a 
wider  range?  Are  those  things  which  we  see,  handle,  touch, 
hear,  or  taste,  with  their  changes,  alone  matters  of  fact;  or 
may  there  not  exist  other  matters  of  fact,  entirely  distinct 
from  the  world  of  visible  things,  that  cannot  come  under  the 
cognizance  of  any  of  our  senses  ?  If  so,  then  the  instrument 
by  which  we  attain  unto  a  knowledge  of  these  matters  of  fact 
must  be  altogether  ditFerent  from  the  senses.  Is  there  such 
an  instrument?  Certainly ;  in  consciousness  is  found  the 
instrument,  as  real  in  its  operation  and  clear  in  the  knowl- 
edge it  imparts,  as  is  seen  in  the  agency  of  the  senses. 

"What  is  the  consciousness? 

The  consciousness  is  that  which  directly  gives  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  volitions  of  the  mind  and  all  the  desires  of  the 
heart.  Is  not  an  act  of  will  a  matter  of  fact?  Is  not  to  us 
the  certainty  of  our  volitions  as  great  as  the  certainty  of  the 
earth  we  tread  upon?  Does  any  person  doubt  whether  he 
wills  to  do  this  or  that  thing  ?  Does  he  doubt  whether  he 
feels  pleasure  or  pain  ?  Is  the  mind  less  certain  of  the  fe-el- 
ing  of  sorrow  or  joy,  of  hatred  or  love,  of  confidence  or  dis- 
trust, than  of  the  stars  that  sparkle  in  the  sky,  or  the  flower 
that  adorns  the  field  ?  But  the  acts  of  the  volition,  or  feeling, 
cannot  come  under  the  cognizance  of  the  senses.  The  anato- 

3  (33) 


34  WHAT  ARE  MATTERS   OF  FACT? 

mist,  with  his  knife  and  miseroscope,  may  dissect  the  body, 
and  view  the  minute  wonders  of  the  liuman  frame ;  but  can 
his  microscope  and  knife  avail  him  in  dissecting  the  vastly 
more  mysterious  mechanism  of  thought  and  feeling?  No. 
This  belongs  to  the  domain  of  psychology,  not  physiology. 
The  instrument  by  which  we  analyze  the  former  is  conscious- 
ness, the  latter  the  senses.  It  is  in  making  the  senses  com- 
prise all  matters  of  fad,  and  confounding  all  the  facts  of  con- 
sciousness with  simply  the  relation  of  ideas,  as  that  the  three 
angles  of  a  triangle  are  equal  to  two  right  angles,  or  the 
whole  is  greater  than  a  part,  that  the  mind  is  led  to  depre- 
ciate the  commonest  and  clearest  facts  of  our  beins:.  But  are 
the  facts  of  the  consciousness  equally  clear?  Certainly  not. 
No  more  than  are  all  the  facts  of  the  senses.  The  naturalist, 
in  observing  the  phenomena  of  nature,  varies  in  degree  of 
certainty.  In  his  scale  of  facts  there  is  a  belief  based  upon 
the  highest  certainty,  and  a  belief  less  sure,  ranging  down 
even  to  the  lowest  probability.  To  arrive  at  certainty  the 
senses  must  have  ample  opportunity  for  observation ;  they 
must  not  be  hmited  in  respect  to  their  exercise,  but  must 
have  ample  field  for  operation.  Much  is  said  of  the  decep- 
tion of  the  senses;  but  the  senses,  properly  understood,  never 
deceive.  The  senses  only  promise  a  true  decision  when 
suitably  used.  If  but  partially  used,  if  but  limited  in  their 
legitimate  sphere,  their  decision  must  correspond  to  the 
character  of  their  exercise;  precisely  the  same  is  it  with  the 
consciousness.  The  consciousness,  properly  understood,  never 
can  deceive;  but  then  it  must  have  a  fair  field  for  its  exer- 
cise. There  are  innumerable  facts  of  consciousness,  ransinsr 
from  those  which  all  believe  in  to  the  more  obscure  and  less 
defined.  But  what  is  the  remedy  for  a  true  classification  of 
the  facts  of  consciousness?  Just  the  same  which  the  natu- 
ralist resorts  to  in  the  true  classification  of  the  facts  of  the 
senses — careful  observation.  The  instrument  of  the  conscious- 
ness must  be  used  with  as  much  discrimination  as  that  of  the 
senses.  But  here  consists  the  difierence.  The  senses  have 
to  do  with  that  loithout  us;  while  the  consciousness  is  limited 
exclusively  to  that  ivithin  us.     We  cannot  run  after  the  facts 


WHAT  ARE  MATTERS   OF  FACT?  35 

of  the  consciousness;  they  must  be  observed  at  the  same 
time  they  appear  in  the  consciousness.  The  mind  must  be 
abstracted  from  the  external  world,  must  retire  within  itself, 
and  ponder  upon  those  facts  that  constantly  present  them- 
selves in  the  soul.  Self-demonstration  to  us  will  be  the 
highest  demonstration.  It  will  be  proof  as  great  as  any  de- 
rived from  the  observation  of  the  senses.  But  more  than 
this:  the  facts  of  consciousness  exist  with  all;  for  the  facts 
of  the  senses  we  go  abroad;  but  the  facts  of  the  conscious- 
ness are  found  at  home.  It  will  not  do  to  form  a  system,  and 
bend  the  facts  of  consciousness  to  that  system.  It  will  not 
do  to  theorize:  we  must  observe.  Like  the  naturalist,  we 
must  content  ourselves  with  ascertaining  facts,  not  building 
systems.  Our  minds  must  be  limited  to  strict  observation 
of  facts,  and  then  induction  from  facts.  By  this  way  all  the 
leading  facts  of  consciousness  will  be  distinctly  recognized, 
and  perfect  agreement  will  exist;  because  there  will  be  the 
same  self-demonstration  with  all  of  the  same  facts.  But  if, 
instead  of  careful  observation  of  facts,  and  deductions  from 
facts,  the  mind  abandons  itself  to  system-building,  it  will  fall 
into  errors  equally  as  pernicious  as  those  errors  that  existed 
in  physics  before  the  Baconian  principle  of  induction  took 
the  place  of  the  old  philosophy  of  ages  of  ignorance  and 
presumption.  From  units  we  must  go  to  universals,  and 
not  from  universals  to  units.  Having  seen  that  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  intelligence,  the  sensibility,  and  the  will  are 
facts  as  real  as  the  phenomena  of  the  external  world,  we  are 
prepared  to  answer  the  question^  For  what  purpose  do  we 
investigate  the  facts  of  consciousness?  Let  us  confine  our- 
selves to  the  facts  of  consciousness  universally  admitted. 
Who  doubts  that  he  wills,  or  thinks,  or  feels?  Who  is 
there  that  is  not  persuaded  of  his  acts  of  volition?  Who 
does  not  believe  as  certainly  in  his  thoughts  and  feelings  as 
in  any  of  the  phenomena  of  the  external  world?  But  by 
what  instrument  is  it  that  he  knows  that  he  feels,  wills,  or 
thinks?  Simply  the  consciousness.  Certainty  in  these  facts 
is  as  absolute  as  certainty  in  any  of  the  facts  of  the  senses, 
and  man  must  be  annihilated  before  he  loses  his  belief  in 


36  WHAT  ARE  MATTERS   OF  FACT? 

thouglit,  feeling,  and  will.  It  is  as  impossible  to  doubt  these 
facts  as  that  of  the  existence  of  an  external  world.  Why, 
then,  do  we  examine  matters  of  fact,  be  they  of  the  senses  or 
of  the  consciousness  ?  The  reply  is,  To  find  out  the  laiv,  the 
principle  of  order  that  reigns  supreme  in  all  matters  of  fact. 
To  what  purpose  to  us  would  it  be  to  have  a  collection  of 
facts,  be  they  of  the  senses  or  of  the  consciousness,  if  we 
could  not  find  out  the  law  of  facts,  if  or^der  was  unknown, 
and  if  by  induction  we  should  be  unable  to  ascertain  the 
laws  that  link  together  every  separate  class  of  facts. 

What,  then,  is  meant  by  the  law  of  facts?  Simply  the 
uniform  relation  of  antecedent  and  consequent.  For  in- 
stance, "  fire  burns  the  hand."  The  induction  is  that  always 
it  will  burn  the  hand.  "A  weight  falls  to  the  ground." 
The  induction  is  that  invariably,  tinder  like  circumstances, 
heavy  bodies  will  fall  to  the  ground.  "Oil  mixed  with  water 
rises  to  the  top."  The  induction  is  that  water  and  oil  will 
not  mingle  together.  Thus,  in  the  observation  of  the  facts 
of  the  external  world,  we  study  the  laws  of  those  facts ;  we 
examine  into  the  invariable  relation  of  antecedent  and  con- 
sequent. Is  it  not  the  same  with  the  facts  of  consciousness? 
Are  there  no  laws  except  what  relate  to  the  sphere  of  the 
senses?  Do  not  the  facts  of  consciousness  have  their  own 
peculiar  laws  adapted  to  their  own  mental  and  normal  state? 
Is  it  not  the  law  of  the  will  to  lead  to  action  ? — of  the  sensi- 
bility to  awaken  emotion  and  to  influence  the  will? — of  the 
intelligence  to  secure  knowledge  ?  We  come,  then,  to  the 
conclusion  that  internal  phenomena,  that  the  facts  of  the 
senses  and  consciousness  are  entirely  distinct;  that  we  can- 
not bring  the  senses  to  analyze  the  consciousness,  or  the 
consciousness  the  senses.  Each  have  their  separate  sphere. 
The  one  has  to  do  alone  with  the  world  without  us,  while 
the  other  is  exclusively  confined  to  the  world  within  us.  We 
come,  then,  to  the  conclusion  that  the  universal  law  of  every 
phenomenon,  whether  of  the  senses  or  of  the  consciousness, 
is  founded  upon  an  inherent  principle  of  the  mind:  the 
relation  of  antecedent  and  consequent,  cause  and  eftect. 
The  sufficient  reason  is  not  so  much  seen  to  be  as  known  to 
be.     It  is  a  pure  conception  of  reason.     A  first  truth,  an  ab- 


WHAT  ARE  MATTERS   OF  FACT?  37 

solute  necessity  of  the  very  construction  of  tlie  mind.  The 
simple  uncompounded  ideas  cannot  be  defined.  Thus  the 
knowledge  of  our  identity,  of  our  self-existence,  the  fact 
that  I  exist,  is  a  truth  of  consciousness ;  it  does  not  admit  of 
argument  or  of  definition.  I  know  that  it  is  so,  because  I 
feel  it,  I  realize  it.  I  cannot  doubt  it.  I  act  every  hour 
upon  the  belief  of  it.  I  labor  for  it.  I  eat,  drink,  and  sleep 
for  it.  I  cannot  persuade  myself  out  of  it.  This  is  all  that 
can  be  said,  and  it  is  enough.  It  is  a  truth  of  intuition,  of 
pure  reason,  of  the  highest  consciousness,  and  therefore  can- 
not be  compounded  or  defined,  or  made  any  clearer  by  any 
amount  of  argument  or  process  of  reasoning.  Equally  evi- 
dent is  it  that  in  the  consciousness  the  universal  law  of  every 
phenomenon  must  be  intuitively  seen  and  felt  and  acknowl- 
edged by  all.  Thus  the  relation,  or  law  of  cause  and  eftect, 
or  sufficient  reason;  and  the  result  is  not  so  much  seen  as 
known.  It  is  instantly,  and  upon  all  occasions,  felt  as  a  first 
truth,  a  fact  of  pure  reason,  and  an  invariable  attendant  upon 
every  act  of  consciousness.  We  all  believe  in  it,  because  we 
feel  it;  we  always  act  upon  it,  because  we  know  it.  Every 
person  in  his  own  experience  is  fully  persuaded  of  it.  As 
soon  as  a  change  is  perceived,  we  know  it  must  have  a  cause. 
As  soon  as  an  eftect  is  produced,  we  know  something  must 
have  produced  it.  We  feel  intuitively  that  every  consequent 
must  have  an  antecedent;  every  operation  a  sufficient  reason. 
Such  is  the  fundamental  law  of  our  consciousness ;  other- 
wise all  the  facts  of  the  world  within  us  would  avail  us 
nothing.  We  would  be  lost  in  all  induction;  rather  we 
could  have  no  induction.  For  what  is  induction?  It  is 
simply  a  right  classification  of  facts  to  arrive  at  the  law  of 
those  facts.  But  if  there  is  no  invariable  relation  of  ante- 
cedent and  consequent,  cause  and  effect,  how  can  the  mind 
ever  attain  unto  the  law  of  facts  ?  If  fire  burns  one  person 
and  freezes  another,  if  gravity  brings  one  heavy  body  to  the 
ground  and  raises  another  up  from  the  ground,  where  is  the 
induction  of  the  law  of  heat,  or  of  gravity?  Of  what  use  is 
reasoning  from  facts  to  their  law  when  there  is  no  law,  or  an 
endless  contradiction  of  law?  If  there  is  no  invariability  of 
antecedent  and  consequent,  but  an  endless  discord  between 


38  WHAT  ARE  3IATTERS   OF  FACT? 

them,  then  all  facts  would  be  a  confused  jumbling  together 
of  materials  that  would  either  lead  to  no  knowledge,  or  only 
lead  to  misguide.  Is  it  not,  then,  the  first  axiom  of  pure 
reason,  the  most  immediate  and  invariable  truth  of  con- 
sciousness, that  every  eftect  must  have  a  cause,  every  conse- 
quent an  antecedent,  every  result  a  sufficient  reason?  Can 
there  be  any  mistake  here?  No.  We  must  admit  this 
law  or  rush  into  absolute  skepticism.  One  only  alternative 
is  to  doubt  everything,  or  admit  this  law.  We  must  doubt 
an  external  world  and  an  internal  world,  our  own  existence, 
and  the  existence  of  things  without  us,  all  matters  of  fact, 
and  all  the  relation  of  ideas.  We  must  rush  into  self-annihi- 
lation, disown  our  own  being,  and  live,  feel,  and  act  as  if 
there  was  neither  a  world  within  us  nor  without  us.  We  must 
deny  all  rules  of  obligation  and  ever}-  principle  of  duty;  all 
faith,  all  reason,  all  induction,  and  all  consciousness. 

But  can  we  do  this?  Impossible !  There  is  a  point  reached 
when  the  most  obstinate  skepticism  is  compelled  to  cure  itself, 
when  the  most  unlimited  doubts  are  forced  to  work  their 
own  ruin.  Whether  we  will  or  not,  the  facts  of  the  external 
world  enter,  by  the  avenue  of  the  senses,  into  the  mind.  To 
doubt  the  facts  of  the  world  without  us,  we  must  destroy  the 
senses;  and  to  doubt  the  facts  of  the  world  within  us,  we 
must  d:estroy  the  consciousness;  and  we  can  deny  neither, — 
we  are  compelled  to  admit  the  facts  of  both. 

"  The  law  of  every  phenomenon,"  says  Jouffroy,  "  is  a 
pure  conception  of  reason ;  like  all  legitimate  axioms,  as 
soon  as  we  perceive  any  change  whatever,  we  know  at  once 
that  it  is  an  effect,  that  it  has  a  cause,  that  this  cause  has 
acted  to  produce  it, — that  it  has  been  determined  to  produce 
it  by  some  deciding  influence,  and,  finally,  that  this  eff*ect 
becomes  itself  a  cause,  and  produces  in  its  own  turn  some 
new  result.  All  this  is  the  product  of  reflection  alone,  before 
observation  has  ascertained  the  cause,  the  operation,  the 
sufficient  reason,  and  the  result.  All  this  appears  to  be  true, 
not  because  we  see  that  it  is,  but  because  we  know  that  it 
must  be ;  and  precisely  on  account  of  this  necessity  our 
reason  confidently  applies  it  to  all  possible  cases,  and  regards 
it  as  the  universal  law  of  every  phenomenon." 


CHAPTEE  III. 

GENERAL  LAWS  OF  THE  EARTH  AND  SUN. 

"  "What  we  call  a  general  law,"  says  Whewell,  "  is  in  truth 
a  form  of  expression  including  a  number  of  facts  of  the  like 
kind.  The  facts  are  separate,  the  unity  of  view  by  which  we 
associate  them,  the  character  of  generality  and  of  law  resides 
in  those  relations  which  are  the  object  of  the  intellect.  The 
law  once  apprehended  by  us,  takes,  in  our  minds,  the  place  of 
the  facts  themselves,  and  is  said  to  govern  or  determine  them, 
because  it  determines  our  anticipations  of  what  they  will  be. 
But  we  cannot,  it  would  seem,  conceive  a  law  founded  on 
such  intelligible  relations  to  govern  and  determine  the  facts 
themselves,  any  otherwise  than  by  supposing  also  an  intelli- 
gence by  which  these  relations  are  contemplated  and  these 
consequences  realized.  We  cannot,  then,  represent  to  our- 
selves the  universe  governed  by  general  laws,  otherwise  than 
by  conceiving  an  intelligent  and  conscious  Deity,  by  whom  the 
laws  were  originally  contemplated,  established,  and  applied. 
This,  perhaps,  will  appear  more  clear,  when  it  is  considered 
that  the  laws  of  which  we  speak  are  often  of  an  abstract  and 
complex  kind,  depending  upon  relations  of  space,  time,  and 
other  properties,  which  we  perceive  by  great  attention  and 
thought.  These  relations  are  often  combined  so  variously 
and  curiously  that  the  most  subtle  reasonings  and  calcula- 
tions which  we  can  form  are  requisite,  in  order  to  trace  their 
results.  Can  such  laws  be  conceived  to  be  instituted  without 
any  exercise  of  knowledge  and  intelligence  ?  Can  material 
objects  apply  geometry  and  calculation  to  themselves  ?" 

When  we  have  ascertained  the  law  of  facts  in  the  physical 
world,  we  are  compelled  by  the  very  existence  of  that  law  to 
attribute  it  to  some  intelligent  cause.  By  this  principle  alone 
can  we  account  for  the  operation  of  laws  acting  all  in  due 

(39) 


40  GENERAL  LAWS   OF 

proportion  and  harmony,  never  conflicting  with  each  other, 
and  so  adjusted  as  to  secure  the  wisest  purposes. 

Consider  the  law  of  gravity  by  which  the  earth  is  kept  in 
its  peculiar  sphere,  and  all  other  worlds  are  controlled  in 
their  position  and  velocity.  By  this  law  all  bodies  are 
attracted  inversely  as  the  square  of  their  distance.  How 
happened  it  that  a  mathematical  law  so  exact  is  so  universal  ? 
Why  do  all  our  researches  in  astronomy  reveal  the  same 
uniform  law?  Our  essential  idea  of  chance  is  irregularity? 
and  blind,  meaningless  action.  We  may  imagine  a  fortuitous 
concourse  of  atoms,  but  we  never  can  ascribe  to  fortuitous  con- 
course an  undeviating  principle  of  regularity,  binding  in  har- 
mony all  worlds,  and  preserving  the  harmless  equilibrium  of 
all  motion.  Suppose  the  law  of  attraction  different  from 
what  it  now  is,  one  thing  can,  with  certainty,  be  predicted. 
The  existing  state  of  things  upon  this  earth  would  be  alto- 
gether changed.  Imagine  this  law,  instead  of  inversely  as 
the  square  of  the  distance,  to  be  directly  as  the  square  of  the 
distance,  what  would  be  the  result?  Under  this  law  the 
gravity  of  bodies  at  the  surface  of  our  world  would  be  de- 
stroyed. There  would  be  nothing  that  would  weigh  or  fall 
downward.  A  ball  thrown  up  in  the  air  would  revolve  like 
the  moon  around  the  earth.  All  stability  would  cease,  and 
no  sooner  would  things  be  raised  from  the  ground  than 
the}'  would  describe  a  circle  around  the  earth.  And  yet  it 
has  been  shown  by  JSTewton  that,  so  far  as  the  solar  system 
was  concerned,  planets  would  revolve  round  their  suns  in 
circular  orbits.  Why,  if  there  is  no  designing  mind,  should 
precisely  that  law  take  place  that  w^ould  secure  orbits  nearly 
circular,  and  yet  not  interfere  with  the  gravit}'  of  each  planet  ? 
If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  law  had  been  inversely  as  the  cube 
of  the  distance,  it  would  follow  that  a  planet  would  describe 
a  spiral  line  about  the  sun,  and  either  come  perpetually 
nearer  to  him,  or  go  farther  from  him.  If,  again,  the  attrac- 
tion had  been  inversely  as  the  simple  ratio  of  the  distance,  it 
would  have  altogether  interfered  with  the  stability  and  har- 
mony of  the  system.  Why,  then,  was  precisely  that  law  in- 
stituted that  is  in  every  respect  most  adapted  to  the  preser- 


THE  EARTH  AND   SUN.  41 

vation  of  the  earth  and  the  comfort  of  all  who  live  in  it  ? 
Why,  then,  if  there  was  no  designing  mind,  would  it  not 
have  been  different?  Gravity,  as  l^ewton  himself  declares, 
is  an  appendage  to  the  essential  qualities  of  matter,  not  an 
inherent  property  of  all  matter.  If,  then,  we  imagine  it 
universal  to  all  matter,  we  have  yet  in  right  to  consider  it 
necessary  to  matter.  When  we  thus  consider  the  simplicity 
of  this  law  with  its  universality,  when  we  reflect  that  the 
same  law  holds  good  with  the  atoms  of  matter,  as  all  spheri- 
cal bodies,  what  reason  have  we  to  ascribe  a  principle  of 
attraction  so  indispensable,  and  yet  so  uniform,  to  anything 
but  an  intelligent  cause?  That  all  particles  of  matter  and 
all  worlds  should  obey  thus  harmoniously  this  law,  and  yet 
no  contriving  mind  to  originate  it,  seems  in  the  highest  de- 
gree incredible.  Observe  the  mass  of  our  earth.  The  earth 
moves  in  a  slightly  oval  orbit  around  the  sun,  and  is  nearer 
the  sun  in  the  winter  by  one-thirtieth  of  the  diameter  of  its 
orbit.  'So  far  as  we  can  judge,  the  force  of  gravity  depends 
upon  the  mass  of  the  earth.  If,  now,  the  force  of  gravity  was 
much  greater  or  much  less  than  it  is,  the  whole  order  of 
things  would  be  deranged  upon  this  earth ;  we  would  see  all 
things  too  light  or  too  heavy ;  all  voluntary  or  involuntary 
motion  would  be  either  painful  through  the  increase  of 
w^eight,  or  unstable  through  its  decrease.  With  difficulty 
would  we  walk  or  run,  and  the  muscular  exercise  of  all  ani- 
mals would  be  attained  with  extreme  fatigue,  or  our  move- 
ments would  be  too  quick  and  unstable.  Thus  the  earth 
would  be  like  an  ill-adjusted  machine.  It  is  w^ell  known 
that  vegetables  have  the  power  of  pumping  up  into  the 
branches  and  leaves  the  sap  that  nourishes  the  plant.  This 
internal  force  is  great,  as  has  been  proved  by  experience. 
Hales  found,  for  instance,  that  a  vine  in  the  bleeding  season 
could  push  up  its  sap  in  a  glass  tube  to  the  height  of  twenty- 
one  feet  above  the  stump  of  an  amputated  branch.  Now, 
the  whole  support  of  the  vegetable  creation  depends  upon 
the  exact  adjustment  of  the  force  of  gravity.  It  has  been 
found  that  not  only  are  different  vegetables  adapted  alone  to 
a  different  climate,  and  a  particular  season  of  the  year,  but 


42  GENERAL  LAWS   OF 

the  power  of  gravity  must  be  what  it  now  is,  neither  less  nor 
more,  or,  as  the  consequence,  the  vegetable  creation  withers 
and  dies.  Was  our  earth  twice  as  heavy  or  as  light  as  it 
now  is,  vegetation,  as  now  constituted,  would  not  exist.  The 
sap  would  run  in  that  way  as  effectually  to  preclude  all 
growth.  Thus,  we  see  that  the  law  of  gravity  is  exactly 
adjusted  to  existing  laws  of  the  vegetable  world. 

Consider  also  the  distribution  of  the  day  and  the  year: 
the  one  marks  the  revolution  of  the  earth  upon  its  axis; 
the  other,  the  revolution  of  the  earth  around  the  sun.  iN'ow, 
the  year  is  adjusted  to  the  cycle  of  the  vegetable  world,  even 
as  it  is  to  the  wants  of  the  animal  creation.  Thus  also  it  is 
with  the  length  of  the  day.  Was  the  day  six  hours  long  in- 
stead of  twenty-four,  the  existing  relations  of  the  vegetable 
and  animal  world  would  be  altogether  changed.  So  also 
if  our  year  was  six  months  instead  of  twelve  months  long. 
Why,  then,  should  we  have  our  days  and  our  years  exactly  to 
correspond  to  the  necessities  of  animals  and  vegetables? 
Why  the  solar  year  so  invariable  in  its  length?  Can  it  with 
reason  be  imagined  that  no  design  is  shown  in  the  wonder- 
ful harmony  that  prevails  in  the  length  of  the  year  and  day, 
and  the  existing  wants  of  the  animal  and  vegetable  world? 
If  our  day  was  but  six  or  twelve  hours  in  length,  what  de- 
rangement would  ensue  to  the  earth!  Neither  the  proper 
period  of  sleep  or  action  would  exist.  Our  days  would  be 
too  short  for  labor  or  for  rest.  If  also  the  year  was  but  six 
months  long,  the  system  of  vegetation  would  be  wholly  in- 
terrupted. Thus,  in  every  respect,  w^e  see  deep  foresight  in 
the  adjustment  of  the  day  and  year  for  living  in  the  world. 
But  how  could  such  an  adjustment  be  developed  from  the 
constitution  alone  of  man,  animals,  and  plants?  Upon  the 
supposition  of  an  infinitely  wise  Creator  it  can  easily  be  ac- 
counted for,  but  it  cannot  be  attributed  to  any  other  cause. 
Consider  the  wonderful  exactness  in  the  length  of  the  day. 
According  to  the  calculations  of  Laplace,  it  is  impossible  that 
the  difference  of  one-hundredth  of  a  second  of  time  should 
have  obtained  between  the  length  of  the  day  in  the  earliest 
ages  of  the  world.     Why  is  it,  then,  we  see  no  retarding  of 


THE  EARTH  AND   SUN.  43 

motion  in  this  machine,  when  under  no  circumstances  is  it 
possible  for  us  to  construct  one  with  invariable  motion?  Is 
there  any  inherent  principle  in  the  matter  of  the  earth  that 
for  thousands  of  years  sends  it  spinning  round  its  axis  with- 
out losing  even  a  second  of  time  ?  Had  the  earth  slackened 
in  its  motion  but  the  hundredth  part  of  a  second  of  time  in 
a  revolution,  the  day  would  be  lengthened,  during  six  thou- 
sand years  since  the  creation  of  man,  six  hours,  and  thus  the 
whole  animal  and  vegetable  economy  of  our  earth  would  be 
deranged.  But  the  same  law  is  also  necessary  for  the  pre- 
servation of  the  annual  motion  of  the  earth.  If  the  motion 
was  retarded  by  any  other  law  instead  of  the  one  we  now 
have,  the  earth  would  approach  nearer  and  still  nearer  to 
the  sun,  until  it  reached  the  center.  Thus  also  with  the  other 
planets.  They  would  all  at  last  fall  into  the  sun,  and  the  whole 
solar  system  w^ould  become  one  chaotic  mass.  Of  all  laws, 
then,  the  one  selected  for  the  earth's  motion  on  its  axis  is  the 
best.  Of  all  possible  ones,  it  is  the  only  one  that  secures 
stability  and  harmony  to  the  planetary  system.  But  what 
would  the  earth  be  without  the  sun  ?  And  yet  the  sun  is  a 
self-luminous  body,  while  the  earth  and  all  the  planets  are 
opaque  bodies.  That  the  sun  should  be  the  center  of  our 
planetary  system,  itself  luminous,  while  all  the  bodies  re- 
volving round  it  are  wholly  different,  and  still  no  designing 
mind  to  construct  the  one  to  give  light  and  heat,  and  the  rest 
to  be  only  the  recipients  of  light  and  heat,  is  impossible.  For 
with  Avhat  appearance  of  plausibility  can  we  suppose  the 
planets  to  be  by  some  unknown  principle  struck  oft'  from  the 
sun,  and  yet  not  partake  of  the  light-imparting  and  heating 
power  of  the  sun  ?  Our  solar  system  without  the  sun  would 
be  locked  up  in  the  chains  of  eternal  cold  and  darkness:  no 
life  or  vegetation  would  be  possible;  and  yet  the  planets, 
if  they  were  not  created  distinct  from  the  sun,  having  no 
self-luminous  and  heating  property,  then  they  must  have  had 
their  origin  from  the  sun.  But  if  the  planets  originated  from 
the  sun,  which  is  a  light-bearing  and  heat-imparting  agent, 
how  then  could  they  be  directly  the  reverse  ?  If,  as  has  been 
supposed,  the  light  and  heat  of  the  sun  proceed  from  its 


44  GENERAL  LAWS   OF 

coating  or  peculiar  atmosphere,  why  have  not  the  planets 
the  same  ?  How  happens  it,  if  they  have  a  common  origin, 
that  we  should  see  no  semblance  between  the  planets  and 
the  sun  ?  Xow,  although  the  sun  is  the  machine  that  lights 
up  and  warms  the  planets,  yet  without  this  it  could  be  the 
center  of  attraction;  but  then  the  planets  would  reyolye 
round  the  sun  only  as  a  rayless  and  dead  assemblage  of  clods, 
utterly  cold  and  repulsiye.  The  light  and  heat  are  super- 
added to  the  more  mechanical  arrangements  of  the  uniyerse. 
Suppose,  now,  no  interposition  was  necessary  to  regulate  the 
raoyemeuts  of  the  system,  how  can  we  account  for  the  pecu- 
liar condition  of  the  sun,  by  which,  in  all  the  planetary  reyo- 
lutions,  we  haye  days  and  seasons?  Can  gravity  be  any 
solution  to  this  difficulty?  If  the  solar  machine  can  move 
of  itself,  what  first  set  it  a  going,  and  then  gave  days  and 
seasons  ?  Light  and  heat  are  immeasurably  diiferent  from 
gravity.  How  came,  then,  the  sun  to  have  light  and  heat,  and 
not  the  planets  that  revolve  round  it  ?  Thus  clearly  did  the 
greatest  of  astronomers  perceive  the  necessity  of  sonie  design- 
ing mind. 

"And  thus  might  the  sun  and  fixed  stars,"  says  Xewton, 
"be  formed,  supposing  the  matter  were  of  a  lucid  nature. 
But  how  the  matter  should  divide  itself  into  two  sorts,  and 
that  part  which  is  fit  to  compose  a  shining  body  should  fall 
down  into  one  mass  and  make  a  sun,  and  the  rest,  which  is 
fit  to  compose  an  opaque  body,  should  coalesce  not  into  one 
great  body  like  the  planets,  or  the  planets'  lucid  bodies,  like 
the  sun,  how  he  alone  should  be  changed  into  a  shining  body 
while  all  they  continue  opaque,  or  all  they  be  changed  into 
opaque  ones,  while  he  continued  unchanged,  I  do  not  think 
explicable  by  mere  natural  causes,  but  am  forced  to  ascribe 
it  to  the  counsel  and  contrivance  of  a  voluntary  agent." 

There  is  nothins^  more  wonderful  than  lio-ht:  when  we  con- 
sider  the  vast  variety  of  purposes  that  it  subserves,  the  inti- 
mate relation  that  it  sustains  to  all  vegetation,  and  its  absolute 
necessity  for  all  sight,  we  are  not  more  impressed  with  the 
universality  of  its  agency  than  with  the  greatness  of  its  be- 
neficence.    How  would  all  vegetation  and  animal  life  cease, 


THE  EARTH  AND  SUN.  45 

did  one  long  night  of  Egyptian  darkness  rest  upon  the  earth  I 
Consequently  among  all  the  material  emblems  to  represent 
the  peculiarities  of  the  mental  state,  the  figure  of  light  is 
most  impressive  and  most  common.  So  wonderful  is  light  in 
its  action,  so  needful  is  it  for  our  wants,  that  we  embody  as 
our  highest  idea  of  wretchedness  a  state  of  interminable  dark- 
ness. But  light  possesses  laws  of  the  most  remarkable  nature. 
"Whether  light  be  the  emission  of  luminous  particles  from  the 
sun,  or  vibrations  through  a  most  subtile  and  elastic  ether  per- 
vading all  space,  has  not  yet  been  fully  determined,  although 
the  latter  view  is  most  common  at  the  present  day.  But  light 
possesses  an  amazing  velocity.  When,  then,  we  consider  the 
rapidity  of  its  movements,  vastly  greater  than  that  of  any 
other  substance,  with  its  properties  of  reflection,  refraction, 
polarization,  and  periodical  colors  produced  by  crystals  and 
by  their  plates  ;  when  we  reflect  upon  its  perfect  adaptation 
to  vision,  painting  with  inimitable  beauty  upon  the  retina 
of  the  eye  not  only  every  diversity  of  color,  but  the  most 
exact  proportion  of  objects,  taking  into  the  field  of  its  vision 
alike  the  lofty  mountain,  the  ocean,  with  its  ceaseless  motion, 
the  bird,  the  flower,  and  the  minutest  insect,  how  impressive 
is  the  evidence  of  design !  "Was  there  any  appreciable 
weight  to  the  sun-ray,  the  eye  would  be  instantly  destroyed. 
Could  the  subtile  process  of  chemistry  discover  the  most  at- 
tenuated size  to  the  particles  of  light,  their  amazing  velocity 
from  the  sun  would  be  as  fatal  to  all  vegetable  and  to  all  animal 
life  as  a  deluge  from  the  heavens  of  cannon-balls.  W^iy,  then, 
should  weight  be  imparted  to  matter  precisely  where  it  is 
needed,  and  all  appreciable  weight  taken  away  where  it  is  not 
needed  ?  Here  is  a  substance  most  intimately  related  to  heat, 
lighting  up  the  world  with  glory,  painting  the  sky  with  a 
thousand  tints  of  beauty,  imparting  heat  to  all  vegetable  ex- 
istence, and  joy  to  all  animal  motion;  unveiling  the  love- 
liness of  every  landscape,  and  the  grandeur  of  revolving 
worlds,  and  yet  in  itself  so  harmless,  so  beneficial,  so  univer- 
sal, that,  penetrating  through  the  vast  regions  of  space,  it 
shows  forth  the  mute  praise  of  all  inorganic  substances,  and 
inspires  with  electric  pleasure  all  sensitive  existence.     How 


46  GENERAL  LAWS  OF 

can  atheism,  when  there  is  contemplated  the  properties  of 
light,  its  essential  dissimilarity  from  all  material  things,  its 
power  of  reflection,  by  which  it  is  reflected  and  scattered  by 
all  objects,  and  then  comes  to  the  eye  from  all ;  its  power  of 
refraction,  by  which  its  course  is  bent  when  it  passes  obliquely 
out  of  one  transparent  medium  into  another,  and  by  which, 
consequently,  convex,  transparent  substances,  such  as  the 
cornea  and  the  humors  of  the  eye,  possess  the  fliculty  of 
making  the  light  converge  to  a  focus  or  point ;  with  its  power 
of  polarizatio7i,  by  which,  when  the  vibrations  of  light  are 
transverse,  they  may  be  resolved  into  two  diff'erent  planes,  or 
double  refraction;  by  which,  when  they  fall  on  a  medium  which 
has  difi'erent  elasticity  in  diflferent  directions,  they  will  be 
divided  into  two  sets  of  vibrations, — how,  when  light 
possesses  peculiarities  so  wonderful,  can  it  ever  imagine  that 
no  designing  mind  made  the  light,  and  adjusted  it  to  the 
varied  wants  of  the  universe  ? 

Contemplate  the  laws  of  heat  in  respect  to  the  earth,  the 
atmosphere,  and  the  water.  The  earth,  like  all  solid  bodies, 
is  capable  of  conducting  heat  and  of  radiating  heat.  There 
is  this  peculiarity  in  respect  to  the  earth, — that  if  this  mass  of 
matter  varied  much  from  its  present  magnitude  and  density, 
or  from  the  laws  of  heat  now  pertaining  to  it,  all  vegetation 
and  animal  life,  as  now  existing,  must  cease.  There  are  laws 
of  mathematical  precision  that  limit  the  degree  of  heat  in  its 
conduction  and  radiation  to  its  prescribed  measure.  Now, 
there  is  no  reason  why  the  earth  should  conduct  and  radiate 
heat  as  it  now  does  necessarily.  The  earth  might  possess 
different  elements,  and  then  the  measure  of  heat  would  be 
altogether  changed.  If  the  earth  were  a  globe  of  pure  iron, 
it  would  probably  conduct  heat  twenty  times  as  well  as  it  now 
does;  if  its  surface  were  polished  iron,  it  would  only  radiate 
one-sixth  as  much  as  it  does.  Changes  far  less  than  these 
would  subvert  the  whole  thermal  condition  of  the  world,  and 
make  it  unfit  for  habitation.  Consider  the  laws  of  heat  in 
respect  to  the  atmosphere.  We  live  in  an  aerial  ocean  most 
beneficently  adjusted  in  its  composition  to  vegetable  and 
animal  life.     The  atmosphere  possesses,  in  diff'erent  propor- 


THE  EARTH  AND   SUN.  47 

tions,  dry  air,  or  air  free  from  water  and  aqueous  vapor,  both 
transparent  and  highly  elastic.  The  machinery  of  the  weather 
is  not  only  extremely  complex,  but  most  happily  adjusted  to 
the  wants  of  vegetables  and  animals.  The  heat  of  diflerent 
climates  is  ditiused  and  tempered  by  the  atmosphere.  Its 
range  of  influence  is  from  the  poles  to  the  equator:  thus  it 
circulates  over  the  whole  earth.  It  executes  many  smaller 
circuits  between  the  sea  and  the  land.  It  enters,  as  an  essen- 
tial element,  into  the  growth  of  plants  and  animals.  It  is  the 
atmosphere  that  converts  sunbeams  into  daylight.  It  is  the 
great  medium  of  sound,  and  thus  performs  the  distinct  office 
of  communication  between  intelligent  creatures  ;  and  yet 
such  is  the  weight  and  due  quantity  of  the  atmosphere,  that 
the  most  violent  winds  soon  subside,  and  perform  the  friendly 
office  of  purifying  the  climate,  and  affording  facility  to  all 
navigation.  "While  the  atmosphere  is  ever  present,  it  is  never 
in  our  way;  adapting  itself  to  the  endless  changes  of  heat,  it 
combines  every  element  essential  to  our  happiness ;  possessing 
a  mobility  the  most  remarkable,  it  contains  properties  so 
distinct,  that  it  subserves  purposes  the  most  varied.  Was  the 
amount  of  the  atmosphere  much  greater,  or  was  its  weight 
different  from  what  it  now  is,  either  too  heavy  or  too  light, 
all  existence,  animal  or  vegetable,  would  be  in  the  highest 
degree  endangered;  were  the  proportion  of  the  elements  that 
enter  into  the  atmosphere  in  any  considerable  degree  changed, 
life  would  not  exist.  Possessing  a  small  portion  of  carbonic 
acid,  it  imparts  the  carbon,  when  light  is  present,  to  vegeta- 
bles, while  at  the  same  time  it  receives  from  plants  the  disen- 
gaged oxygen.  Thus  an  element  essential  to  animal  life  is 
absorbed  in  the  atmosphere;  while  carbon,  which,  beyond  a 
certain  proportion,  is  highly  pernicious,  is  by  plants  extracted 
from  the  atmosphere.  Did  this  atmosphere  possess  a  propor- 
tion of  oxygen  one-fourth  or  one-third  greater  than  its  present 
amount,  there  would  be  too  much  fuel  for  animal  life  ;  was 
the  proportion  of  nitrogen  much  greater  than  it  now  is,  there 
would  be  too  little  to  support  life.  Thus  the  exact  amount 
of  nearly  one-tifth  oxygen  to  four-fifths  nitrogen  is  proved  to 
be  the  degree  most  conducive  to  life.     Was  it  chance  that 


48  GENERAL  LAWS   OF 

mingled  these  subtile  gases  thus  appropriately  together? 
The  aqueous  portion  of  the  atmosphere  varies  from  the  one- 
hundredth  to  the  one-twentieth  part  of  the  whole  aerial  ocean 
that  encircles  the  earth.  Observe  that  the  aqueous  air  is  as 
essential  as  the  dry  air;  both  combined  are  necessary  for 
vegetable  and  animal  life.  The  atmosphere  is  the  vehicle  to 
convey  the  aqueous  vapor.  "Was  now  this  vapor  administered 
pure,  it  would  not  have  subserved  the  wants  of  the  orgafiiized 
creation  ;  it  must  be  diluted  by  the  agency  of  the  divy  air  to  be 
serviceable.  Suppose  there  were  no  other  atmosphere  but 
the  vapor  which  arises  from  its  watery  parts,  we  can  easily 
anticipate  the  result.  The  heat  being  greater  at  the  equator, 
there  would  ensue  greater  rarity  and  elasticity  to  the  vapor 
than  what  existed  toward  the  poles.  There  would  then  be 
a  perpetual  current  of  steam  toward  the  poles,  which,  coming 
in  contact  with  the  colder  vapor  of  the  poles,  would  be  pre- 
cipitated into  rain  or  snow;  and  thus,  while  there  would  be 
a  cloudless  sky  at  the  equator,  in  all  other  latitudes  there 
would  be  perpetual  clouds,  fogs,  and  rains,  and  near  the 
poles  an  incessant  fall  of  snow.  "While  had  we  only  dry  air,  we 
should  find  most  seriously  injured  all  plants  and  animals, 
l^ow  we  have  both  so  adjusted  together  that  we  have  just 
that  variety  in  the  climate  essential  for  the  welfare  of  the  or- 
ganized creation.  But  more  than  this,  amid  incessant  change 
there  is  a  constant  tendency  to  a  proper  equilibrium.  We 
never  find  such  an  excess  of  only  one  element  of  the  atmos- 
phere, or  such  a  violence  of  it,  as  permanently  to  interfere 
with  the  welfare  of  vegetation  and  animal  existence.  Steam 
and  air,  both  elastic  and  transparent  fluids,  while  so  nearly 
alike,  yet  vary  in  respect  to  their  expansion  by  heat  so  much 
as  to  be  useful  antagonistic  forces.  Thus,  the  same  degree 
of  heat  applied  produces  currents  in  different  directions, 
and  there  is  such  a  mixture  and  balancing  of  these  fluids 
that  our  fields  and  fruits  have  alternate  sunshine  and  water, 
and  thus  in  the  happiest  degree  is  the  growth  of  vegetation 
developed.  The  influence  of  these  two  fluids  upon  the  tem- 
perature is  most  import^^nt :  one  moderates  the  other.  Now, 
among  so  many  conflicting  laws  of  heat  operating  upon  the 


THE  EARTH  AND  SUN.  49 

elements  that  compose  the  atmosphere,  it  is  remarkable  that 
the  adjustment  is  so  uniform  that  every  derangement  of  the 
atmosphere  has  a  certain  limit  where  it  must  stop.  Here 
are  different  laws  of  heat :  each  acting  unrestrained  would 
bring  ruin  upon  the  earth;  but  they  are  so  counterbakmced 
by  opposite  laws,  are  so  restrained  by  antagonist  forces,  that 
altogether  they  move  in  harmony,  or  wdien  that  harmony  is 
temporarily  interrupted,  they  carr}^  within  themselves  a  prin- 
ciple of  self-preservation  that  soon  restores  the  deranged 
equilibrium.  Thus,  a  tempest,  however  violent,  is  soon  over ; 
and  the  ocean  waves,  however  lashed  by  the  wind,  never  pass 
beyond  a  prescribed  limit.  But  why  should  it  be  so,  if  there 
is  no  controlling  mind  to  regulate  the  laws  of  the  weather  ? 
"Why,  when  the  ship  oscillates  to  and  fro,  and  the  tempest 
wave  beats  upon  it,  should  that  oscillation  not  keep  on  in- 
creasing in  intensity  until  it  results  in  the  ruin  of  the  vessel  ? 
Why,  when  it  has  reached  a  certain  point,  should  it  suddenly 
stop  and  begin  a  retrogressive  movement  ?  TVhat  inherent 
necessity  is  there  in  the  atmosphere  that  perpetually  should 
teach  it  the  same  unvarying  moderation,  and  bind  the  unsta- 
ble winds  within  a  sphere  of  action  as  exact  as  that  which 
controls  the  raging  of  the  sea?  The  exact  adjustment  of 
conflicting  laws,  so  that  all  should  act  in  harmony,  is  the 
highest  evidence  of  infinite  skill. 

In  observing  the  transmission  of  heat  through  water,  we 
perceive  a  marked  difference  from  the  transmission  of  heat 
through  solids.  Heat  is  communicated  through  water,  not 
by  being  conducted  from  one  part  of  the  fluid  to  another,  as 
in  solid  bodies,  but  by  being  carried  with  the  parts  of  the 
fluid  by  means  of  an  intestine  motion.  The  general  law  of 
heat  is  to  expand,  and  make  lighter  water  by  means  of  the 
colder  portion  of  the  water  descending  to  the  warmer  part, 
and  that  taking  the  place  of  the  warm  water.  Opposite  cur- 
rents are  engendered,  by  which  there  is  a  speedy  equalization 
eflfected  of  temperature  unlike  the  slow  process  of  conduction 
of  heat  through  solids.  Hence  we  see  the  temperature 
of  water  much  more  uniform  than  the  surrounding  atmos- 
phere, and  inequalities  much  less   than  in  solids.     Conse- 

4 


50  GENERAL  LAWS  OF 

quently  a  reciprocal  influence  is  exerted  by  land  and  water. 
The  heat  of  the  former  is  greatly  modified  by  the  presence  of 
water,  so  that  both  extremes  of  heat  and  cold  are  diminished. 
Water,  by  heat,  expands,  while  by  cold  it  contracts.  Observe 
how  deviations  from  a  law  so  nniform  take  place  under  those 
circumstances  adapted  for  the  preservation  of  all  organic 
life.  Was  this  law  not  departed  from  in  any  state  of  the 
water,  the  result  would  be  that  all  the  lakes  and  rivers  would 
be  locked  up  in  ice.  Animal  and  vegetable  existence  would 
eventually  cease  whenever  there  was  the  prevalence  of  cold. 
The  reason  is  obvious.  As  the  heat  declined  the  cold  water 
would  be  congealed  into  ice  and  form  upon  the  bottom  of 
bodies  of  water,  since  the  heavier  particles  of  water  would 
naturally  descend  to  the  bottom,  and  thus  there  soon  would 
be  formed  a  solid  body  of  ice,  which  would  gradually  increase 
until  the  whole  was  frozen.  Now,  water  contracts  by  cool- 
ing down  to  forty  degrees  of  Fahrenheit's  thermometer ;  in 
cooling  further  it  expands,  and  when  cooled  to  thirty-two  de- 
grees it  freezes.  Thus  we  see,  however  much  it  cools,  it 
cannot  form  upon  the  bottom  of  rivers  and  lakes  in  ice,  for 
as  soon  as  it  contracts  by  cold  down  to  forty  degrees  it  begins 
to  expand,  and  thus  by  its  superior  levity  rises  to  the  top. 
Another  peculiarity  of  water  is,  that  in  the  very  act  of  freez- 
ing at  the  temperature  of  thirty-two  degrees  it  experiences  a 
new  and  sudden  expansion,  by  which  the  ice  at  all  tempera- 
tures ever  floats  upon  the  top  as  specifically  lighter  than  the 
surrounding  water.  Thus,  by  this  remarkable  deviation  from 
the  law  of  expansion  by  heat  and  contraction  by  cold,  we  see 
obviated  the  most  terrific  evils.  The  ice,  being  a  very  bad 
conductor  of  heat,  while  it  equalizes  the  temperature  of  the 
water,  can  never  become  too  thick  for  subsequent  melting, 
.  unless  in  the  extreme  polar  regions;  while  water,  by  cold, 
assumes  the  form  of  ice,  by  heat  it  takes  the  form  of  steam. 
The  moisture  that  floats  in  the  air  is  essential  for  all  vegeta- 
tion. The  aqueous  vapor  by  condensation  produces  clouds  ; 
when  there  is  an  increase  of  cold  the  aqueous  vapor  becomes 
snow  through  a  process  of  crystallization.  There  is  a  pecu- 
liar circumstance  attending  the  change  of  ice  to  water,  and 


THE  EARTH  AND  SUN.  51 

water  to  steam.  This  takes  place  according  to  an  invariable 
degree  of  heat,  but  not  suddenly ;  when  we  increase  the  heat 
to  this  degree  where  thaw  commences,  and  where  boiling 
takes  place,  there  is  a  stand  taken  in  the  temperature.  Thus, 
the  temperature  of  a  thawing  mass  of  ice  cannot  be  raised 
until  the  whole  is  thawed  ;  nor  can  the  temperature  of  steam 
rising  from  water  be  raised  until  the  whole  is  converted  into 
steam.  By  this  arrangement  all  changes  occupy  a  considera- 
ble time ;  if  it  was  different,  thaw  and  evaporation  would  be 
instantaneous :  consequently  all  water,  when  reaching  the  boil- 
ing point,  would  flash  into  steam,  and  at  the  first  touch  of 
heat,  snow  and  ice  would  be  dissolved  into  water.  Observe, 
that  in  condensation  and  evaporation  there  is  an  obvious 
violation  of  a  law  at  a  certain  point ;  thus,  while  by  this  reverse 
movement  ice  is  made  lighter  than  water,  so  as  to  float  upon 
it,  the  change  at  a  certain  degree  of  heat  is  so  gradual  that 
the  most  beneficial  results  ensue.  How  happened  it,  if  there 
was  no  designing  mind,  that  this  law  of  contraction  by  cold 
and  expansion  by  heat  should  at  a  certain  point  be  reversed, 
and  thus  adapt  itself  to  the  wants  of  the  world  ?  With  other 
fluids  other  laws  do  in  fact  exist, — why,  if  there  is  no  con- 
triving mind,  should  we  see  with  water  so  singular  an  adapta- 
tion to  the  necessities  of  the  world  ? 

No  laws  are  so  indispensable  for  existence  upon  this  earth 
as  the  laws  of  friction.  In  ordinary'  cases  with  solids,  their 
movement  through  the  agency  of  friction  often  exceeds 
one-third,  one-half,  and  sometimes  even  the  whole  of  their 
weight.  Observe  now,  that  friction  is  intermediate  between 
two  great  forces:  the  property  of  cohesion  that  exists  in 
the  growth  of  vegetation  with  the  ever-movable  power  of 
growth,  and  the  pumping  up  of  the  sap  into  the  branches 
and  leaves,  and  the  fixed  property  of  crystallization  that  exists 
in  solids.  If  friction  partook  of  the  mobility  of  the  former, 
the  highest  instability  would  exist  upon  the  earth;  or  if  of  the 
immobility  of  the  latter,  all  things  would  be  enchained  in 
bonds  that  would  preclude  all  life.  Without  friction  we  could 
not  walk :  we  should  be  prevented  from  making  anything, 
and  the  most  ordinary  purposes  of  life  would  be  wholly  frus- 


52  GENERAL  LAWS   OF 

trated.  Observe  the  singular  adaptation  of  friction  to  tlie 
world  we  live  in.  Did  friction  exist  in  the  heavens  where 
the  planets  move,  all  motion  would  be  stopped,  and  there 
would  be  ruin  to  every  planet  and  sun  in  the  universe.  Did 
friction  not  exist  upon  the  earth,  a  ruin  equally  as  great 
would  ensue.  Thus  we  see  that  it  exists  where  it  is  wanted, 
and  does  not  exist  where  it  is  not  wanted.  Was  friction  not 
intermediate  between  the  crystalline  forces  that  bind  rocks 
together,  and  the  perpetual  mutability  of  vegetables,  equally 
impossible  would  be  existence.  "What  is  needed  in  friction 
is  the  capacit}^  of  readily  receiving  alternately  the  states  of 
rest  and  motion.  And  thus  we  find  it,  because  objects  can 
easily  be  put  in  motion,  and  yet  soon  by  friction  return  to  a 
condition  of  rest,  there  is  an  unlimited  sphere  opened  up  for 
the  contrivance  and  the  energy  of  man.  Thus,  friction  is 
neither  abolished  upon  the  earth,  nor  active  in  the  heavens. 
But  we  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  friction  is  a  necessary 
result  of  other  properties  of  matter,  as  of  their  solidity  and 
coherency.  So  far  as  we  know,  friction  is  a  separate  prop- 
erty of  matter,  and  bestowed  upon  it  for  the  wisest  ends. 
Observe  the  stability  of  the  solar  system.  It  has  been  seen 
that  there  is  no  appreciable  friction  in  the  heavens,  conse- 
quently all  the  deviations  observed  during  the  different  ages 
of  the  world  reveal,  even  if  there  be  a  resisting  medium,  a 
proportion  of  irregularity  infinitely  small.  The  movement 
of  the  earth  on  its  axis  has  not  changed  the  hundredth  part 
of  a  second.  The  perpetual  perturbations  of  the  planets  in 
each  other's  motions  are  found  to  be  not  indefinitely  pro- 
gressive, but  periodical.  They  reach  a  maximum  value  and 
then  diminish.  Thus,  in  the  solar  system  we  find  a  constant 
provision  for  its  stability ;  and  whatever  may  be  the  irregu- 
larities existing,  they  are  only  periodical,  and  even  tend  to 
adjust  themselves.  Reflect  upon  the  infinite  value  of  such  a 
state  of  things.  Did  the  perturbations  of  the  planets  continue 
progressive,  those  perturbations  would  increase  to  a  degree 
as  to  destroy  all  stability  in  the  universe.  The  planetary 
orbits,  from  being  nearly  circular,  would  tend  incessantly  to 
a  more  oval  form,  until  such  would  be  the  eccentricities  of 


THE  EARTH  AND  SUN.  53 

motion  as  that  planet  would  jostle  against"  planet,  and  all 
eventually  would  tumble  into  the  sun.  How,  without  divine 
foresight,  could  the  adjustments  of  the  thirty  different  bodies 
connected  with  our  solar  system  be  so  made  as  that,  while 
mutually  attracting  each  other,  each  describing  different 
orbits,  and  all  diverse  motions,  they  yet  would  never  interfere 
with  each  other's  movements,  and  continue  upon  the  whole 
in  one  undeviating  course  of  regularity?  When,  in  the 
greatness  of  this  problem,  we  must  include  the  fact  that  even 
the  perturbations  are  periodical,  and  estimate  also  the  differ- 
ent velocities  of  each  planet  around  its  axis,  as  well  as  around 
tlie  sun,  and  then  reflect  that  the  different  degrees  of  weight 
of  every  planet  enters  as  an  essential  element  into  the  calcu- 
lation, is  it  conceivable  that  any  cause  than  an  infinitely 
powerful  and  intelligent  Being  could  preserve  such  harmony, 
and  bring  about  such  perfect  stability  ? 

"  I  have  succeeded  in  demonstrating,"  says  Laplace,  "  that, 
whatever  be  the  masses  of  the  planets,  in  consequence  of  the 
fact  that  they  all  move  in  the  same  direction  in  orbits  of 
small  eccentricities,  and  slightly  inclined  to  each  other,  their 
secular  inequalities  are  periodical,  and  inclined  within  nar- 
row limits;  so  that  the  planetary  system  will  only  oscillate 
about  a  mean  state,  and  will  never  dev^iate  from  it,  except 
by  a  very  small  quantity.  The  ellipsis  of  the  planets  always 
will  be  nearly  circular.  The  ecliptic  will  never  coincide  with 
the  equator,  and  the  entire  extent  of  the  variation  in  its 
inclination  cannot  exceed  three  degrees." 

Now,  when  we  consider  that  of  the  simple  substances  that 
enter  into  the  composition  of  our  world  there  may  be  about 
fifty,  and  that  each  of  these  substances  possesses  different 
mechanical  and  chemical  laws,  operating  in  a  way  perfectly 
distinct  from  each  other,  how  can  it  be  supposed  that  these 
simple  substances  would,  by  their  own  accord,  adapt  them- 
selves to  each  other  ?  Be  it  remembered  they  no  more  make 
up  our  earth,  of  themselves,  than  do  the  iron  and  timber  and 
all  the  varied  materials  of  a  man-of-war  floating  upon  the 
water  make  up  the  vessel,  when  they  are  originally  taken  in 
their  native  state.     These  materials  have  got  to  be  adjusted 


54        GENERAL  LAWS  OF  THE  EARTH  AND  SUN. 

together;  they  must  be  put  into  their  proper  place;  each 
separate  part  of  the  ship  must  develop  the  contrivauce  of 
some  mind;  there  must  be  order  and  proportion  and  exact 
weight  observed.  There  must  be  a  skillful  collection  of  the 
whole  ;  foresight  shown  in  the  proportion  of  every  plank,  the 
driving  of  every  nail,  the  length  of  every  rope,  and  the  fasten- 
ing of  every  sail.  All  these  distinct  materials  do  not  jostle 
themselves  together  into  the  stately  vessel  that  marches  in 
majesty  over  the  waters.  There  must  be  a  contriving  mind. 
Even  so  is  it  with  the  arrangements  of  the  substances  that 
make  up  our  world.  A  wisdom,  whose  profound  depths  no 
finite  intelligence  can  fathom,  is  revealed  in  the  machinery 
of  the  world  and  the  universe,  giving  harmony  to  every 
diversity  of  law,  disarming  the  power  of  every  antagonistic 
element,  adjusting  every  separate  force,  giving  due  propor- 
tion to  every  substance,  and  uniting  all  in  one  sublime  and 
glorious  whole. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


THE    DEVELOPMENT   THEORY. 


The  author  of  the  "Vestiges  of  Creation"  holds,  in  his 
development  theory,  the  same  ideas,  essentially,  as  Oken  and 
Lamarck.  Thus,  he  says :  "  The  fundamental  form  of  or- 
ganic being  is  a  globule  forming  within  itself,  and  that 
globules  can  be  produced  in  albumen  by  electricity,  conse- 
quently that  electricity  is  the  cause  of  life."  "All  animals 
pass  in  embryo  through  phases  resembling  the  general  as 
well  as  the  particular  character  of  those  of  lower  grade." 
"Man  himself  is  not  exempt  from  this  law, — his  first  form  is 
that  which  is  permanent  in  the  animalcula.  This  organiza- 
tion gradually  passes  through  conditions  generally  resembling 
a  fish,  a  reptile,  a  bird,  and  the  lower  mammalia ;  at  one  of 
the  last  stages  of  his  fcetal  career  he  exhibits  an  intermax- 
illary bone,  which  is  characteristic  of  the  perfect  ape;  this  is 
suppressed,  and  he  may  then  be  said  to  take  leave  of  the 
simial  type,  and  become  a  true  human  creature.''  Sex,  too, 
in  the  "  Vestiges  of  Creation,"  is  spoken  of  as  a  matter  of 
development.  "  All  beings  are  at  one  stage  of  the  embryotic 
process  female,  and  a  certain  number  of  these  are  afterwards 
to  be  of  the  more  powerful  sex."  "  The  first  step  in  the  crea- 
tion of  life  upon  this  planet  was  a  chemico-electric  operation, 
by  which  simple  gernAnal  vesicles  were  produced.  The  next 
step  was  an  advance,  under  favor  of  peculiar  conditions,  from 
the  simplest  forms  of  being  to  the  next  more  complicated, 
and  this  through  the  medium  of  the  ordinary  process  of 
generation ;  and  finally,  that  the  simplest  and  most  primi- 
tive type,  under  a  law  to  w^hich  that  of  like  production  is 
subordinate,  gave  birth  to  the  type  next  above  it,  and  this 
again  produced  the  next  higher,  and  so  on  to  the  very 
highest." 

(55) 


56  THE  DEVELOPMENT  THEORY. 

The  researches  of  science  show,  in  direct  opposition  to  the 
development  theory,  that  man  and  all  the  species  of  animals 
owe  their  origin  direct  to  miracle.  Sajs  the  celebrated  Ger- 
man physiologist,  M.  Muller  :  "All  the  phenomena  hitherto 
observed  in  the  animal  kingdom  seem  to  prove  that  the 
species  were  originally  created  distinct,  and  independent  of 
one  another.  There  is  not  a  remote  possibility  that  one 
species  has  been  produced  from  another." 

Unless  we  would  have  the  force  of  the  argument  from 
effect  to  cause  immeasurably  weakened  in  respect  to  the 
origin  of  man,  and  the  Deity  lost  sight  of  in  natural  law,  we 
must  beware  of  the  insidious  sophistry  disguised  under  the 
shibboleth  of  law.  Miracle,  instead  of  development,  is 
claimed  for  the  origin  of  man  and  every  species  of  animals. 
It  is  in  the  light  of  this  most  essential  feature  of  our  argu- 
ment from  effect  to  cause  that  the  researches  of  geology  are 
deserving  of  such  careful  consideration.  Those  researches 
most  conclusively  prove  the  miraculous  origin  of  man,  as  de- 
clared in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The  developliient  theory  is 
in  all  respects  shown  to  be  false,  and  thus  natural  law  is  con- 
fined within  its  legitimate  sphere.  Consequently  nature  is 
not  deified  at  the  expense  of  the  great  First  Cause,  and  indi- 
rect as  well  as  direct  atheism  is  disrobed  of  its  pretensions. 
While  Lamarck,  Oken,  and  the  author  of  the  "Vestiges  of 
Creation"  admit  the  existence  of  God,  they  yet  remove  him 
back  to  the  creation  of  atoms,  infusoria,  and  monads,  and 
supersede  a  superintending  God  for  a  fatalistic  principle, 
■whose  rigid  certainty  of  continuance  is  as  revolting  to  the 
most  cherished  sentiments  of  an  unperverted  nature  as  it  is 
to  the  clearest  assertions  of  Revelation.  But  the  development 
theory  not  only  substitutes  law  for  God,  but  it  is  infinitely  de- 
rogatory^ to  human  nature.  There  is  something  noble  in  the 
idea  of  man  created  by  God,  with  a  perfect  physical,  moral, 
and  intellectual  organization  adapted  to  the  loveliness  of 
Paradise.  The  Eden  without  was  but  a  faint  emblem  of  the 
fairer  Eden  within.  But  how  mean,  in  contrast,  is  the  theory 
of  gradual  development,  through  ages  of  time,  from  the  infu- 
soria or  animalcula  created  or  brouo-ht  into  existence  bv  the 


THE  LEVELOFAIEXT   THEORY.  57 

contact  of  electricity  aud  albumen,  and  then  from  that  the 
development  of  the  worm,  the  fish,  the  reptile,  the  bird,  the 
quadruped,  and  finally  man  !  But  the  development  theory  is 
equally  as  revolting  in  its  teachings  respecting  the  progress 
made  from  a  low  type  to  a  high  type  of  sensitive  existence. 
Creation  by  miracle  draws  a  wide  line  of  demarkation  between 
genus  and  species.  It  not  only  denies  that  the  fish  ever  can 
be  developed  into  the  reptile,  or  the  bird  into  a  quadruped, 
or  that  into  man,  hut  it  also  precludes  the  development  of 
one  species  of  animals  into  another  of  the  same  genus.  The 
mackerel  never  produces  the  shark, — the  snake  never  origin- 
ates the  crocodile, — the  eagle  never  a  sparrow, — the  dog 
the  cat,  nor  the  elephant  a  lion.  And,  although  in  man  genus 
and  species  are  synonymous  terms,  since  all  mankind  come 
from  one  stock,  yet  we  see  that  when  there  is  a  fundamental 
difi:erence,  as  in  the  male  and  female  sex,  there  is  no  develop- 
ment chano-iuCT  man  into  woman,  or  woman  into  man.  The 
difi^erence  existing  between  the  two  sexes  is  as  great  now  as 
at  the  first  creation  of  Adam  and  Eve.  The  great  error  of 
the  development  theory  is  that  it  confounds  all  the  original 
distinctions  instituted  hy  God  between  diiFerent  races  or 
species.  It  acts  the  part  of  an  ignorant  child  in  comparative 
anatomy,  who  takes  all  the  bones  of  fishes,  reptiles,  hirds,  and 
mammals  carefully  laid  on  separate  shelves,  and  jumbles  them 
all  up  together  in  one  confused  medley.  This  the  develop- 
ment theorizer  would  call  the  discovery  of  unity ;  but  the 
man  of  true  science  can  find  no  unity  with  individuality  de- 
stroyed. The  development  theory,  in  its  absurd  generaliza- 
tion, overlooks  those  unalterable  distinctions  between  one 
species  and  another,  or  one  genus  and  another,  that  God  has 
made  the  invariable  attendant  of  creation.  A  theory  that 
develops  a  monkey  from  a  fish,  and  man  from  a  monkey,  has 
a  hundredfold  more  of  the  marvelous  than  creation  by 
miracle,  while  it  finds  no  support  either  in  science  or  Reve- 
ation.  In  considering  the  development  theory  we  have  con- 
fined our  remarks  to  animals ;  but  the  objection  is  equally 
strong  when  applied  to  the  vegetable  and  inanimate  creation. 
How  absurd  is  the  theory  that  makes,  by  the  slow  progress 


58  THE  DEVELOPMENT  THEORY. 

of  natural  law,  the  suns,  planets,  and  comets  of  the  universe 
to  be  developed  from  fire  mists,  w^ith  all  their  motions  and 
harmonious  revolutions !  Two  great  facts  fatal  to  the  devel- 
opment theory  are  made  known  in  the  researches  of  geology. 
First,  miraculous  interpositions  have  introduced  the  races 
of  fishes,  reptiles,  quadrupeds,  and  man  at  distinct  epochs  of 
time,  and  in  a  way  that  reveals  each  dynasty  of  fishes,  rep- 
tiles, quadrupeds,  and  man  not  developing  a  higher  dynasty 
from  a  lower  by  the  actual  destruction  of  its  ruling  magnates. 
In  other  words,  the  supremacy  of  the  dynasty  of  reptiles 
over  that  of  fishes,  and  of  quadrupeds  over  that  of  reptiles, 
is  attained  unto,  not  by  gradual  development,  but  by  great 
epochs  of  ruin  to  a  lower  dynasty  making  room  for  a  higher 
one.  There  was  a  time  when  fishes  were  the  highest  type  of 
animals,  and  the  magnates  of  that  genus  held  an  undisputed 
sway.  Afterward  there  followed  a  period  of  great  ruin  to 
the  highest  species  of  fish,  by  which  countless  numbers  were 
destroyed,  leaving  room  for  animals  of  a  higher  organiza- 
tion. Then  followed  the  dynasty  of  reptiles,  and  the  world 
saw  the  most  magnificent  specimens  of  saurians,  and  .other 
reptiles  of  terrific  strength.  After  their  great  epoch  of 
supremacy  had  run  out,  we  are  introduced  to  the  dynasty  of 
birds  and  quadrupeds,  taking  the  place  of  the  wide-spread 
destruction  of  those  reptilian  monarchs  who  held  in  a  pre- 
vious age  an  undisputed  sway.  Here  we  see  great  periods  of 
ruin  introducing  animals  of  higher  organization  ;  but,  instead 
of  a  gradual  development  of  a  superior  type  of  being  from  a 
lower,  we  find  actually  that  the  superior  type  of  being  follows 
the  ruin  of  that  which  precedes  it.  Thus,  we  see  that  the 
ruin  of  an  inferior  organization  of  animals,  instead  of  pre- 
venting the  existence  of  a  superior  type  of  creatures,  is 
actually  necessary  for  the  existence  of  animals  of  a  nobler 
organization.  Each  epoch  of  time  witnesses  at  its  com- 
mencement the  creative  power  of  God,  and  at  its  close  great 
catastrophes  of  ruin.  But  the  development  theory  overlooks 
these  miraculous  interpositions  ;  and  while  it  oflfers  no  reason 
why  the  extinct  species  of  animals  are  not  now  living,  it 
vainly  attempts  to  bridge  over  the  mighty  gaps  in  the  series 


THE  DEVELOPMENT   THEORY.  59 

of  distinct  creations  by  a  chain  of  gradualism  tliat  connects 
the  highest  with  the  lowest.  But  there  is  no  such  chain. 
Gradual  development  only  extends  to  one  species  or  distinct 
class  of  animals;  it  is  only  designed  for  the  perpetuation  of 
them,  but  when  it  has  reached  this  point  it  stops.  Thus, 
the  whale  may  have  a  great  variety  of  forms  and  singulari- 
ties of  construction ;  but  how  can  the  whale  develop  the 
lobster,  or  the  lobster  the  whale  ?  The  second  great  geologi- 
cal fact  fatal  to  the  development  theory  is,  that  there  has 
been  in  each  dynasty  of  fishes,  reptiles,  birds,  and  quadrupeds 
a  process  of  degradation  going  on,  or  a  passing  from  a  high 
organization  in  diflerent  species  to  a  lower  tjpe  of  being. 
Thus,  at  the  commencement  of  each  dynasty  of  fishes,  reptiles, 
birds  and  mammals,  we  see  the  beginning  of  each  dynasty 
giving  us  the  best,  and  not  the  poorest  type  of  organization. 
The  process  of  degradation  is  of  a  twofold  nature.  There  is 
first  a  gradual  extinction  of  difterent  species  in  each  dynasty, 
and  then  an  inferior  type  of  organization  of  the  same  species 
of  animals  now  existing.  Thus,  we  find  not  only  no  fishes, 
or  reptiles,  or  birds,  or  quadrupeds  of  so  high  an  organization 
as  once  existed,  but  even  a  process  of  degradation  in  existing 
species.  What  can  be  more  fatal  to  the  development  theory 
than  this  !  The  whole  error  of  the  development  theory  con- 
sists in  the  confounding  the  progress  of  epochs  of  time  with 
progress  in  epochs.  Because  a  later  epoch  of  time  introduces 
animals  of  a  higher  organization,  it  does  not  show  either 
no  miraculous  interposition  of  God,  or  that  the  animals  of 
a  preceding  epoch  were  not  the  best  of  their  kind.  It 
would  be  poor  reasoning  to  assume  that  because  man  is  su- 
perior to  the  monkey,  that  therefore  the  monkey  developed 
the  man. 

"  It  is  now  a  truth,  which  I  consider  as  proved,"  says  Pro- 
fessor Agassiz,  "that  the  ensemble  of  organized  beings  was 
renewed,  not  only  in  the  intervals  of  each  of  the  great  geo- 
logical formations,  but  also  at  the  time  of  the  deposition  of 
each  particular  member  of  all  the  formations."  "  I  also  be- 
lieve very  little  in  the  genetic  descent  of  living  species  from 
those  of  the  various  tertiary  layers,  which  have  been  regarded 


60  THE  DEVELOPMENT  THEORY. 

as  identical,  but  which,  in  my  opinion,  are  specifically  dis- 
tinct. I  cannot  admit  the  transformation  of  species  from  one 
formation  to  another."  Says  Professor  SedgAvick:  "All  our 
most  ancient  fossil  fishes  belong  to  a  high  organic  type ;  and 
the  very  oldest  species  that  are  well  determined  fall  naturally 
into  an  order  of  fishes  which  Owen  and  Miiller  place,  not  at 
the  bottom,  but  at  the  top  of  the  whole  class."  Says  Presi- 
dent Hitchcock :  "  Numerous  races  of  animals  and  plants 
must  have  occupied  the  globe  previous  to  those  which  now 
inhabit  it,  and  have  successively  passed  away  as  catastrophes 
occurred,  or  the  climate  became  unfit  for  their  residence. 
Xot  less  than  thirty  thousand  species  have  already  been  dug 
out  of  the  rocks,  and,  excepting  a  few  hundred  species, 
mostly  of  sea-shells,  occurring  in  the  uppermost  rocks; 
none  of  them  correspond  to  those  now  living  on  the  globe. 
In  Europe  they  are  found  to  the  depth  of  abovit  six  and  a  half 
miles,  and  in  this  country  deeper ;  and  no  living  species  is 
found  more  than  one-twelfth  of  this  depth ;  all  the  rest  are 
specifically,  and  often  generically,  unlike  living  species ;  and 
the  conclusion  seems  irresistible  that  they  must  have  lived 
and  died  before  the  creation  of  the  present  species." 

"  The  fact  that  fishes  and  reptiles  were  created  at  an  earlier 
day  than  the  beasts  of  the  field  and  the  human  family,"  says 
Hugh  Miller,  "  gives  no  ground  whatever  for  the  belief 
that  the  peopling  of  the  earth  was  one  of  a  natural  kind,  re- 
quiring time,  or  that  the  reptiles  have  been  not  only  the  pre- 
decessors, but  also  the  progenitors  of  the  beasts  and  of  man. 
The  geological  phenomena,  even  had  the  author  of  the  'Ves- 
tiges '  been  consulted  in  their  arrangement  and  permitted 
to  determine  their  sequence,  would  yet  have  failed  to  fur- 
nish not  merely  an  adequate  foundation  for  the  develop- 
ment hypothesis,  but  even  the  slightest  presumption  in  its 
favor." 

Is  it  not,  then,  evident  that  every  distinct  species  of  fish, 
birds,  and  mammals  came  immediately  from  the  creative 
energy  of  the  great  First  Cause  ?  Do  we  not  see  that  the 
first  link  of  the  human  chain,  and  of  every  distinct  genus  and 
species  of  animals,  must  especially  have  a  beginning  from 


THE  DEVELOPMENT   THEORY.  61 

God  ?  These  diversified  species  of  creatures  were  effects  so 
great,  results  so  wonderful,  that  no  adequate,  no  conceivable 
cause  can  be  found  but  God.  We'  look  to  the  laws  of  the 
inorganic  or  organic  world,  to  the  atoms  that  compose  all 
matter,  but  we  find  in  them  no  reason  "for  the  origin  of 
animals.  We  have  investigated  the  half-atheistic  theory  of 
development,  but  all  its  deductions  are  found  chimerical  and 
opposed  to  the  facts  of  true  science.  The  development 
theory  has  nothing  to  commend  it  in  the  history  of  the  past. 
The  beginning  of  the  human  race,  and  of  every  species  and 
genus  of  animals,  assure  us  of  effects  so  peculiar  and  so 
mighty,  that  we  must  look  alone  to  miracle  for  their  cause. 


CHAPTER   V. 

MUTUAL  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  VEGETABLE  AND  ANIMAL  KINGDOM. 

All  vegetables  have  their  distinct  localities,  and  their  pe- 
culiar spheres  of  growth.  Observe  that  one  great  chain  of 
dependence  runs  throughout  nature.  Without  the  elements 
of  heat,  air,  water,  and  earth,  all  vegetables  would  die. 
Without  vegetables  the  great  support  of  the  animal  creation 
would  be  taken  away  ;  without  animals  the  world  would  be  a 
solitary  waste.  But  not  only  is  there  an  intimate  dependence 
of  one  department  of  nature  upon  another,  but  a  great  prin- 
ciple of  compensation  runs  through  the  whole.  The  genera- 
tion of  animals  keeps  pace  with  the  vegetable  growth.  Where 
in  one  department  of  nature  there  is  a  deficiency,  there  is 
in  another  department  a  superabundance  to  make  it  up. 
There  is  constantly  seen  the  operation  of  the  principle  of 
equalization,  by  which  an  excess  of  one  department  of  nature 
is  counteracted  by  a  deficiency  in  another.  Passing  over  the 
peculiarities  of  the  vegetable  creation,  consider  the  animal 
kingdom.  This  world  is  a  living  world:  myriads  of  animals 
people  it.  From  the  short  hour  of  joy  that  marks  the  bound- 
ary of  the  most  ephemeral  of  creatures  to  the  long  years  of 
man,  there  is  seen  the  constant  play  of  life.  If  we  wonder 
at  the  thought  of  man,  yet  those  animalcula  that  live  in  one 
drop  of  water  present  to  us  their  miracles  of  art. 

"  If  there  be  one  thing,"  says  Buckland,  "  more  surpris- 
ing than  another  in  the  investigation  of  natural  phenomena, 
it  is  perhaps  the  infinite  extent  and  vast  importance  of  things 
apparently  little  and  insignificant.  When  we  descry  an  insect, 
smaller  than  a  mite,  moving  with  agility  across  the  paper  on 
which  we  write,  we  feel  as  incapable  of  forming  any  distinct 
conception  of  the  minutiae  of  the  muscular  fibers  which  afi*ect 
their  movements,  and  of  the  still  smaller  vessels  by  which 
(62) 


MUTUAL  ADAPTATION,  ETC.  63 

they  are  nourished,  as  we  are  of  fully  apprehending  the  mag- 
nitude of  the  universe.  We  are  more  perplexed  in  attempting 
to  comprehend  the  organization  of  the  minutest  infusoria 
than  that  of  a  whale.  And  one  of  the  last  conclusions  at 
which  we  arrive,  is  a  conviction  that  the  greatest  and  most 
important  operations  of  nature  are  conducted  by  the  agency 
of  atoms  too  minute  to  be  either  perceptible  by  the  human 
eye  or  comprehensible  by  the  human  understanding." 

The  researches  of  geology  assure  us  that  in  the  past  ages 
of  the  world  there  are  the  remains  of  innumerable  species  of 
animals, — that  successive  layers  of  the  surface  of  the  earth 
make  known  an  amazing  extent  of  animal  organization, — 
that  in  mountains,  composed  to  a  large  degree  of  minute 
shells,  forming  vast  masses  of  limestone  deposits,  there  is 
every  indication  of  myriads  of  animals  once  living  upon  the 
earth.  These  countless  creatures,  so  far  as  the  investigations 
of  science  can  ascertain,  had  as  perfect  an  adaptation  to  a 
former  condition  of  our  earth  as  those  animals  that  now  in- 
habit it.  The  great  fact  is  made  known  that  no  abortive 
creation  of  species  come  upon  the  stage  of  life ;  that,  trace 
back  the  long  years  of  the  past  to  its  remotest  boundary,  and 
the  same  adjustment  of  animals  to  the  sphere  of  their  exist- 
ence is  revealed  as  now  takes  place  in  every  living  species; 
that  the  types  of  animal  life  were  as  perfect  in  their  kind, 
and  had  as  great  an  adaptation  to  their  local  habitation,  as 
now  exists  upon  the  earth.  Now,  adaptation  means  almost  a 
countless  number  of  conditions  of  existence.  The  air,  the 
earth,  the  water,  the  degree  of  heat,  the  kind  of  subsistence, 
must  all  have  in  the  animal  a  corresponding  fitness  of  con- 
stitution. Reflect  how  much  that  one  word  constitution 
includes!  It  means  the  proper  number  and  proportion  of 
limbs,  the  exact  adjustment  of  all  the  senses,  the  internal 
structure  that  shall  precisely  correspond  to  the  outward 
sphere  of  its  existence.  Not  one  suitable  condition  can  be 
wanting,  or  the  whole  animal  mechanism  is  spoiled.  Not 
one  of  the  apparently  minute  circumstances  of  its  being  can 
be  missing  without  detriment  to  animal  life.  Two  things  are 
indispensable  to  secure  the  highest  excellence  to  any  work. 


64  MUTUAL  ADAPTATION,  ETC. 

First,  skill  in  the  construction,  and  tlien  a  wise  purpose  in 
the  use.  How  many  a  work  of  man  has  been  spoiled  from 
the  uselessness  of  its  design  !  The  pyramids  of  Egypt  evince 
skill  and  power;  but  who  is  there  that  can  show  a  wise  use  in 
their  construction  ?  But  not  so  with  the  works  of  God ;  they 
display  both  skill  and  a  wise  end,  not  only  exact  adjustment 
to  time,  place,  subsistence,  and  climate,  but  wisdom  is  seen 
in  the  eyid  of  those  adjustments.  From  the  noblest  specimens 
of  animal  life  to  the  humblest  forms  of  being,  each  not  only 
have  their  appropriate  sphere,  but  each  have  some  wise  end 
to  subserve  in  that  sphere. 


CHAPTER   VI. 

PROCESS    OF   GENERATION   IN   ANIMALS,  AND    GERMINATION   IN 

PLANTS. 

Paley  has  well  said  generation  is  not  a  principle,  but  a  pro- 
cess. Generation  is  no  solution  to  the  question,  What  is  the 
great  cause  that  brings  man  into  being  ?  The  power  in  or- 
ganized bodies  of  producing  bodies  of  like  organization  must 
itself  be  accounted  for.  How  came  this  power  in  organized 
bodies  is  the  question  ?  How  came  the  reproductive  energy 
that  gives  birth  to  man  ?  How  came  this  wonderful  process, 
mysteriously  wrapped  up  in  the  living  body,  by  which  a  like 
body  is  generated  ?  The  language,  "  principle  of  genera- 
tion," explains  nothing.  It  is  itself  to  be  accounted  for. 
The  deepest  researches  assure  us  of  a  most  wonderful  labora- 
tory, where  the  first  process  of  life  goes  on.  We  are  in- 
structed in  the  knowledge  that  a  mechanism  connected  with 
a  vital  energy  works  out  its  miracles  of  art  infinitely  surpass- 
ing all  the  contrivance  of  man.  Who,  then,  should  speak  of 
the  principle  of  generation  accounting  for  animals,  when  that 
very  principle  itself  is  to  be  accounted  for?  But  the  use  of 
the  language  princiiole  of  generation,  as  often  held,  is  an  ab- 
surdity. Principle  is  confounded  with  process.  If  principle 
means  anything,  as  often  used,  it  must  be  the  elementary  cause. 
But  this  cause  is  a  power  distinct  from  the  process  itself  of 
generation.  We  have  another  step  to  take  before  we  can 
stop  with  the  principle  of  generation ;  that  step  must  be  the 
elementary  cause  itself  that  gives  to  generation  its  vital 
energy.  As  well  might  a  factory- girl  show  a  stranger  the 
wheels  and  cogs,  the  straps  and  iron,  that  enter  into  the  ma- 
chinery of  some  great  workshop,  and  pretend  to  account  for 
the  operation  of  the  whole  by  expatiating  upon  the  advan- 
tages of  some  particular  parts.     The  stranger  knows  full  well 

5  (65) 


6Q  PROCESS  OF  GENERATION  JN  ANIMALS, 

that  the  result  eflected  can  be  accounted  for  only  by  a  vast 
variety  of  exact  adjustments ;  by  the  skillful  position  of  every 
wheel,  cog,  and  strap;  by  the  suitable  composition  of  each 
separate  material  that  enters  into  the  whole ;  by  some  force 
constantly  applied ;  and,  above  all,  by  some  designing  mind 
capable  of  constructing  the  machine,  competent  to  effect  its 
suitable  adjustment,  and  able  to  secure  the  agency  of  a  power 
which,  though  blind  in  itself,  could  yet  by  proper  arrange- 
ment bring  about  the  desired  result.  But  all  analogies  drawn 
from  human  mechanism  fail  to  give  a  just  idea  of  the  va- 
riety, the  exquisite  adjustments  of  material,  position,  time 
and  place,  the  elaborate  architecture  of  the  bodies  of  men 
and  animals,  and  the  sublime  mystery  of  the  complicated 
process  that  takes  place  before  birth.  When  a  house  is 
built,  two  things  are  necessary:  first,  the  house  itself,  and 
then  the  scaftblding  needful  for  its  erection.  Before  birth 
w^e  find  made  the  mysterious  elements  of  the  body ;  we  find 
formed  the  complicated  tissue  of  nerves  and  arteries,  millions 
of  blood  channels  in  the  system,  sinews  and  cords,  and  pores 
for  the  circulation  of  the  different  fluids.  We  find  a  labora- 
tory for  the  digestion  of  food  surpassing  all  the  imitation  of 
man ;  an  apparatus  for  breathing  of  the  most  wonderful  na- 
ture. And  yet  a  very  large  part  of  the  foetal  process  is  exclu- 
sively prospective.  Everything  is  preparing  for  the  mighty 
change  that  shall  soon  introduce  the  child  into  a  new  world. 
ISTot  more  conspicuous  is  the  house  itself  than  the  scaffold- 
ing that  is  used  only  for  a  temporary  purpose,  and  is  removed 
as  soon  as  circumstances  demand.  Can  any  person  affirm 
that  the  complicated  instruments  of  the  body,  with  their  ex- 
act adjustments,  are  to  be  accounted  for  exclusively  on  the 
principle  of  generation?  But  generation  is  only  a  process; 
this  process  itself  is  to  be  accounted  for.  Can  a  pin,  a  needle, 
the  simplest  work  of  a  man,  lead  us  to  the  conclusion  of  some 
designing  mind  ?  And  yet  we  blunder  when  we  come  to  a 
workmanship  that  infinitely  surpasses  all  human  ingenuity  ! 
If  the  intelligence  of  the  parent  is  incompetent  for  self  con- 
struction, equally  incompetent  is  it  to  fashion  the  body  and 
the  mind  of  the  child.     Neither  the  parent  nor  the  child  can 


AND    GERMINATION  IN  PLANTS.  67 

achieve  a  wonder  so  mj'sterious.  "  I  have  not  come  into 
existence,"  says  Fichte,  "  by  my  own  power ;  it  woukl  be 
the  highest  absurdity  to  suppose  that  before  I  was  at  all  I 
could  bring  myself  into  existence ;  I  have  then  been  called 
into  being  by  a  power  out  of  myself."  What  makes  the 
process  of  generation  all  the  more  conclusive  of  an  infinitely 
designing  mind,  is  the  fact  that  we  can  trace  back  the 
earliest  commencement  to  a  point  where  no  evidence  can  be 
shown  of  either  the  bones  or  members  of  the  body,  where 
not  even  the  faintest  outline  is  perceptible  of  the  human  sys- 
tem. "When  we  enter  the  studio  of  an  artist  we  find  at  first 
only  the  simple  canvas  upon  which  is  to  be  sketched  the  well- 
known  features  of  a  friend ;  but  if  at  successive  times  we 
enter  the  room  where  the  painter  busies  himself  in  his  task, 
we  find  that  the  first  rude  outlines  are  gradually  filled  up, 
until,  when  the  work  is  done,  we  find  the  perfect  image  of  our 
friend.  Just  so  it  is  in  filling  up  the  outlines  of  the  human 
system,  a  divine  artist  at  successive  stages  fills  up  the  out- 
lines. From  the  first  origin,  where  are  undistinguished  the 
faintest  lineaments  of  the  human  form,  there  appears  at  dis- 
tinct periods  a  bolder  filling  up  of  the  sketch  until  the  whole 
is  perfected.  The  proof  of  design  is  peculiarly  shown  when 
adaptation  is  seen  developed  at  each  separate  period  ;  when 
from  the  earliest  origin  of  the  human  form  to  its  perfect  con- 
summation there  are  revealed  higher  and  yet  higher  evidences 
of  a  Divine  foresight.  There  are  those  who  think  that  when 
they  have  got  a  principle,  as  they  call  it,  they  have  discovered 
a  cause.  In  the  principle  of  germination  in  plants  and  gen- 
eration in  animals,  they  flatter  themselves  they  have  found  out 
all  that  is  needful  to  know  in  respect  to  the  true  cause. 
Here,  say  they,  exist  in  miniature  all  the  diflerent  materials, 
all  the  curious  mechanism  of  the  animal  or  the  plant.  But 
how  do  they  know  this?  How  have  the}-  found  out  a  me- 
chanism that  the  highest  powers  of  the  microscope  fail  to  dis- 
cover? How  do  they  know  that  the  perfect  plant,  or  the 
animal,  exists  in  a  compass  so  infinitelj^  small,  when  the 
highest  researches  of  the  magnifying-glass  fail  to  discover 
even  the  rudest  outlines  ?     Confessino-  the  almost  infinitesi- 


68  PROCESS   OF  GENERATION  IN  ANIMALS, 

mal  nature  of  the  first  germs  of  vegetable  or  animal  life,  why 
do  they  presume  to  draw  upon  their  imaginations  for  a  me- 
chanism in  miniature  that  no  researches  in  science  have  ever 
been  able  to  find  out?  True,  that  mechanism  is  found  at  a 
later  period  in  an  embryo  state,  but  does  that  show  that  it 
existed  in  the  earliest  germs  of  vegetable  or  of  animal  life  ? 
Does  it  throw  any  light  upon  the  mystery  of  the  first  com- 
mencement of  all  animal  or  of  all  vegetable  org-anization  ? 
Will  an}'  pretend  to  prove  that  it  is  the  mechanism  in  the 
germ  or  the  plant  that  by  its  own  power  produces  vegeta- 
bles and  animals?  How  can  this  be  shown?  "Suppose," 
says  Francis  Bowen,  "  that  two  grains  of  sand,  looking  just 
alike,  were  placed  on  the  floor  before  us,  and  while  we  were 
watching  them  they  began  to  expand,  shoot  up,  alter  their 
forms,  take  on  all  the  aspects  and  qualities  of  life,  and  finally 
become  distinct  and  recognizable,  the  one  a  giant  oak-tree, 
and  the  other  a  living  and  moving  creature.  On  witnessing 
so  strange  a  phenomenon,  we  could  not  help  concluding  that 
some  personal  agency  had  produced  it,  some  power  trans- 
cending that  of  man.  After  satisfying  ourselves  that  there  was 
no  deception  .or  mystification  in  the  matter,  we  should  at 
once  refer  it  to  a  supernatural  or  miraculous  cause  ;  nor  would 
this  conclusion  be  at  all  less  logical  if  the  phenomenon  were 
a  frequent  one, — if  there  were  a  mountain  of  such  sand,  from 
which  particular  grains  being  taken  at  the  proper  season,  and 
carried  to  the  proper  place,  both  time  and  place  being  de- 
termined by  experience,  these  results  invariably  followed. 
Now  this  is  a  statement  but  very  little  disguised,  and  vary- 
ing in  no  essential  particular  from  the  description  of  what  is 
actually  and  constantly  taking  place  all  around  us  in  living 
nature.  The  beginning  of  all  life,  and  of  all  tissues,  whether 
animal  or  vegetable,  is  in  certain  primitive  cells  or  germinal 
vesicles,  perfectly  resembling  each  other  in  external  appear- 
ance, and  so  minute  that  they  can  be  discovered  only  under 
high  powers  of  the  microscope.  The  germs  are  alike  to  the 
eye,  but  according  to  the  place  which  each  is  taken  from, 
whether  from  one  side  or  another  of  the  sand-heap,  it  is  de- 
veloped by  a  regular  process  into  a  plant  or  an  animal.     If 


AND    GERMINATION  IN  PLANTS.  69 

you  say  that  there  are  specific  differences  between  these  mi- 
croscopic grains,  each  one  veiling  some  curious  and  elaborate 
machinery,  peculiar  to  itself,  by  which  this  astonishing  result 
is  brought  about,  I  answer  that  your  assertion  is  both  gratui- 
tous and  incredible.  It  is  gratuitous,  for  certainly  we  see  no 
such  machinery,  and  have  no  indication  whatever  of  its  exist- 
ence; we  see  nothing  but  a  little  rectangular  cell  with  a  dot 
in  it.  It  is  incredible,  for  we  can  no  more  conceive  of  the 
possibility  of  a  machine  under  such  circumstances  producing 
such  results,  thi^n  we  can  believe  the  automaton  really  plays 
an  admirable  game  of  chess  solely  by  means  of  wheels, 
springs,  and  cylinders.  In  both  cases  we  declare  with  posi- 
tive conviction,  that  intelligence,  will,  and  conscious  activity 
are  somewhere  at  work  in  this  matter,  that  some  unseen  j^er- 
son  is  actually  causing  the  phenomena." 

A  dead  mechanism  of  bones,  sinews,  veins,  arteries,  limbs, 
and  organs  of  sight,  taste,  touch,  hearing  and  smelling,  would 
avail  nothing  if  the  mysterious  principle  of  life  was  wanting. 
What  makes  the  human  meclianism  so  wonderful  is  the 
great  fact  that  it  is  a  living  mechanism, — a  mechanism  that 
will  endure  when  years  shall  have  passed  away;  a  mechan- 
ism so  delicate  and  yet  so  tenacious,  so  refined  and  yet  so 
strong  that  it  may  survive  the  helplessness  of  infancy,  the 
vicissitudes  of  youth,  the  dangers  of  manhood,  and  the  de- 
crepitude of  old  age ;  a  mechanism  that  in  some  instances 
shall  pass  the  remote  boundary  line  of  a  century.  In  con- 
sidering the  generation  of  the  human  body  and  its  subse- 
quent growth,  the  mind  often  rests  too  exclusively  upon  the 
material  part  of  man.  Absurd  as  the  conclusions  may  be, 
that  the  microscopic  germs  of  animal  or  vegetable  life  em- 
body all  the  mechanism  of  the  vegetable  or  animal  organiza- 
tion, or  that  inherent  powers  exist  in  the  germs  capable  of 
developing  the  bodies  of  animals  or  vegetables,  yet  in  the 
union  of  mind  with  body  the  evidence  is  greatly  increased 
of  the  agency  of  God. 

It  has  been  seen  that  in  the  first  germs  of  vegetable  or 
animal  life  there  is  no  evidence  of  the  complicated  mechan- 
ism of  the  future  state.     These  germs  appear, alike  to  the  eye ; 


70  PROCESS   OF  GENERATION  IN  ANIMALS, 

they  present  to  the  microscope  simply  little  rectangular  or 
circular  cells  with  a  dot  in  them.  Can  we  then  suppose  that 
in  such  cells  is  wrapped  up  the  miniature  mechanism  of  the 
future  body,  with  its  elaborate  contrivances,  its  subdivisions 
of  material,  and  curious  diversity  of  bones,  muscles,  veins, 
arteries,  and  nerves?  Do  we  ever  dream,  when  we  look 
upon  some  curious  specimen  of  human  mechanism,  that  this 
cylinder  of  its  own  accord  jumped  into  its  proper  place,  that 
this  band  cut  itself  out  of  the  raw^  material,  and,  after  passing 
through  a  dozen  processes  to  lit  itself  for  the  machine,  did 
in  reality  go  to  work  to  adjust  itself  to  the  great  water-wheel, 
and  then  that  this  wdieel  put  itself  into  that  position  by  which, 
through  the  motive  power  of  water,  it  intelligently  turned 
the  wdiole  machiner}-  ?  But  those  persons  who  talk  about 
the  human  mechanism  as  if  it  was  a  self-perpetuating,  self- 
acting,  and  self-adjusting  machine, — as  if  its  own  inherent 
powers  gave  miniature  types  of  human  bodies,  and  bestowed 
just  where  was  needed  the  bone  and  muscle,  the  veins  and 
arteries,  the  cords  and  sinews,  the  hair  and  nails,  the  five 
senses  and  the  diiferent  limbs,  are  precisely  as  blind  to  the 
designing  hand  of  God  as  in  the  other  illustration  they  are 
to  the  contrivance  of  man.  They  overlook  essential  distinc- 
tions in  the  one  as  in  the  other.  Three  things  most  distinct 
enter  into  the  living  organization  of  man :  the  body,  the 
animal  life,  the  soul,  or  mind.  Now,  because  we  see  a  com- 
plicated result,  such  as  baffles  all  imitation,  is  this  result  to 
be  attributed  to  the  human  organization  independent  of  a 
divine  agency?  If  from  the  unshapen  marble  a  beautiful 
statue  should  be  chiseled  out,  no  person  is  so  blind  as  to  say 
the  statue  chiseled  itself  out;  but  should  that  statue  reveal 
the  great  miracle  of  w^alking,  sitting,  and  breathing,  and 
manifest  life,  then  the  more  should  we  say  a  foreign  power 
was  at  work  to  enable  the  statue  thus  to  do ;  but  if,  more 
wonderful  still,  that  statue  should  reason  and  think,  should 
feel  pleasure  and  pain,  should  discriminate  right  from  wrong, 
who,  for  a  moment,  would  doubt  the  personal  agency  of  God  ? 
But  consider  that  we  have  millions  of  statues  produced — 
living,  thinking,  feeling,  reasoning,  and  knowing  right  from 


AND    GERMINATION  IN  PLANTS.  71 

wrong.  We  have  every  diversity  of  material,  every  perfec- 
tion of  art,  every  ingenuity  of  design,  all  wrapped  up  in  the 
human  body :  we  see  a  threefold  union  of  mechanism,  life, 
and  mind;  we  see  earth,  air,  and  water  adapted  to  the  body. 
Is  there  not,  then,  the  most  conclusive  evidence  here  of  the 
work  of  an  infinite  mind  ?  When  we  consider  the  wonders 
wrapped  up  in  the  mind,  life,  and  bod}^  of  man,  his  growth 
from  the  smallest  germs,  his  adaptation  to  time,  place,  and 
sphere  of  existence  ;  when  we  contemplate  this  living  organ- 
ism picturing  forth  every  feature  of  the  mind  and  sympathy 
of  the  soul,  and  manifesting  in  every  movement  the  grace  be- 
coming an  intelligent  being,  is  there  not  meaning  in  the 
words  of  inspiration  ? 

"  Canst  thou  by  searching  find  out  God  ?  Canst  thou  find 
out  the  Almighty  unto  perfection  ?  It  is  as  high  as  heaven ; 
what  canst  thou  do?  deeper  than  hell;  what  canst  thou  know? 
The  measure  thereof  is  longer  than  the  earth,  and  broader 
than  the  sea." 


CHAPTER    VII. 

PROSPECTIVE   CONTRIVANCES    OF   ANIMALS. 

One  remarkable  principle  connected  with  the  animal 
economy,  most  singular  in  its  operation,  is  the  vital  energy 
that  is  constantly  repairing  the  waste  of  the  body,  and  in- 
stantly applying  a  remedy  to  the  injury  that  may  happen  to 
the  flesh  or  bones.  If  a  bone  is  broken,  a  new  bone  begins 
to  form  over  the  fracture,  and  actually  makes  the  broken 
part  stronger  than  ever  before.  If  a  flesh  wound  is  inflicted, 
nature  summons  all  her  resources  to  repair  the  waste,  and 
secures,  if  possible,  a  healthy  condition  to  the  wound. 
Thus  the  body  seems  always  to  keep  in  it  sentinels  secretly 
upon  duty,  unobserved,  while  all  goes  well,  but  as  soon  as 
accident  or  crime  inflicts  a  bodily  injury,  then  all  nature's 
resources  are  called  to  the  rescue.  Mark  how  soon,  when 
the  peace  of  a  city  is  disturbed,  the  warning  rattle  is  heard, 
and  its  guardians  fly  to  the  rescue !  Thus,  in  the  animal 
economy  there  walks  also,  unnoticed,  through  every  avenue 
of  the  system,  sentinels  who  keep  the  peace.  When  all  is 
well  we  have  no  warning  rattle,  but  let  some  ruthless  invader 
attack  the  body,  and  then  observe  how  nature  calls  upon  her 
sentinels  to  preserve  her  rights !  Nature  reveals  a  recupera- 
tive power  and  a  warning  power.  The  instinctive  principle 
of  fear,  and  the  surface  of  the  skin,  where  the  seat  of  pain 
peculiarly  lies,  especially  subserve  the  end  of  a  good  police  to 
give  warning  of  danger ;  while  the  recuperative  energy  of  the 
animal  economy  is  the  best  of  physicians,  to  counteract  the 
injuries  that  happen  to  the  body.  Whether  we  go  to  the  top 
of  the  scale  of  animal  life,  or  descend  to  the  lowest  type  of 
sensitive  being,  we  see  a  peculiar  fitness  for  the  sphere  in 
which  each  animal  moves.  Everything  is  perfect  in  its  kind. 
When  man  works,  he  slights  the  humble  workmanship,  and 
exhausts  his  time  upon  the  nobler  specimens  of  his  invention. 
(t2) 


PROSPECTIVE   CONTRIVANCES  OF  ANIMALS.       73 

Not  80  with  God :  the  body  of  a  bee  is  as  perfect  in  its  make 
as  that  of  a  mau. 

"  Birds  in  cleaning  their  feathers  are  supplied  with  a  kind 
of  oil  for  this  purpose.  There  is  on  each  side  of  the  rump  of 
birds  a  small  nipple,  which,  by  pressure,  yields  for  their  pur- 
pose a  butter-like  substanoe,  by  which  the  bird  anoints  and 
adjusts  the  feathers.  Why,  unless  designed  by  God,  should 
not  unfeathered  animals  have  the  same?" 

"The  heron  and  cormorant  are  great  fishers;  the  middle 
claw  is  toothed  and  notched  like  a  saw.  This  greatly  assists 
them  in  holding  their  slippery  prey.  The  gannet,  or  solan 
goose,  has  the  edges  of  its  bill  irregularly  jagged,  that 
it  may  hold  the  faster  its  prey.  Can  we  attribute  these 
peculiar  structures  to  the  manner  of  using  these  parts? 
Another  simple  contrivance  is  the  tongue  of  the  icoodpecker. 
This  bird  lives  upon  insects  chiefly  lodged  in  the  bodies  of 
decayed  trees.  First,  it  is  furnished  with  a  straight,  angular, 
hard  and  sharp  bill ;  with  this  it  bores  into  the  wood,  until 
it  reaches  the  cells  of  the  insects,  then  comes  the  tongue,  of 
such  length  that  the  bird  can  dart  it  out  three  or  four  inches 
from  the  bill.  Not  only  in  this  respect  does  it  difier  from  the 
tongue  of  other  birds,  but  it  is  tipped  with  a  sharp,  stiff, 
bony  thorn ;  then  this  tip  is  dentated  on  both  sides  like  the 
beard  of  an  arrow  or  barb  of  a  hook.  When  the  bird  has 
discovered  the  retreats  of  the  insects,  with  a  motion  exceed- 
ingly quick,  it  darts  out  this  long  tongue,  and  then  transfixes 
them  upon  the  barbed  needle  at  the  end  of  it,  and  thus  draws 
its  prey  within  the  mouth."  As  Paley  has  well  said  (in  these 
and  the  following  illustrations),  "  If  this  be  not  mechanism, 
what  is?" 

"  The  air-bladder  of  a  fish  is  a  plain  evidence  of  contrivance. 
It  is  a  philosophical  apparatus  in  the  body  of  a  fish.  By  the 
relaxation  or  compression  of  the  muscles  of  the  fish,  the  air- 
bladder  renders  the  fish  specifically  lighter  or  heavier  than  the 
water,  and  thus  at  pleasure  the  fish  rises  or  sinks  in  the  water. 

"  ThQfang  of  a  viper  is  a  perforated  tooth  loose  at  the  root ; 
close  to  its  root,  and  communicating  with  the  perforation,  is  a 
small   bag   containing  the   poison.     When  irritated,  by  the 


74       PROSPECTIVE   CONTRIVANCES  OF  ANIMALS. 

pressure  of  its  root  against  the  bag  underneath  it  the  poison 
is  forced  throuo:h  the  tube  in  the  middle  of  the  tooth.  What 
an  effectual  weapon  for  inflicting  injury  !" 

"  The  bag  of  the  opossum  is  a  singular  contrivance  for  the  pro- 
tection and  support  of  its  young.  There  is  a  false  skin  that 
forms  a  pouch,  into  which  the  yoang  are  received.  Nor  is  it 
a  mere  doubling  of  the  skin,  but  a  new  organ  furnished  with 
bones  and  muscles  of  its  own ;  this  forms  the  cradle  and  con- 
veyance of  the  young.  Was  not  intention  shown  in  this 
contrivance?" 

"  The  stomach  of  the  camel  retains  large  quantities  of  water, 
and  keeps  it  unchanged  for  a  considerable  time  ;  this  is  ab- 
solutely needful  to  enable  the  camel  to  journey  in  the  desert, 
where  so  seldom  are  they  enabled  to  get  water.  What,  then, 
is  the  internal  organization  that  secures  a  purpose  so  benefi- 
cent to  the  camel  ?  There  are  a  number  of  distinct  sacs  or 
bags  (thirty  have  been  discovered  in  the  dromedary)  that  lie 
between  the  membranes  of  the  second  stomach,  and  open 
near  the  top  into  the  stomach  by  small,  square  apertures 
through  these  orifices.  After  the  stomach  is  full  the  annexed 
bags  are  filled  from  it,  and  the  water  so  deposited  is  not  liable 
to  pass  into  the  intestines,  and  is  kept  from  the  solid  aliment, 
and  preserved  from  mixture  with  the  gastric  juice." 

The  prospective  contrivances  of  the  young  of  animals 
afford  clear  illustration  of  some  great  designing  mind.  Ob- 
serve that  the  period  before  birth  is  a  sphere  of  being  essen- 
tially different  from  an  after-state  of  existence.  The  teeth, 
the  eyes,  the  lungs,  are  all  useless  at  that  time,  but  infinite 
foresight  has  prepared  them  to  exercise,  precisely  when 
wanted,  their  appropriate  office.  They  lie  wrapped  up  se- 
curely in  their  first  habitation  for  the  eventful  period  when 
they  shall  be  called  upon  to  perform  their  new  functions. 
Here  we  see  the  same  provident  care  displayed  by  God  as 
afterward  is  shown  in  leading  animals  to  provide  for  their 
young.  Thus,  whatever  may  be  the  sphere  of  action,  each 
sphere  has  its  own  appropriate  duties,  and  the  whole  life,  with 
all  its  changing  seasons,  from  its  earliest  dawn  to  the  last 
closino;  scene,  makes  known  the  watchful  care  of  an  infinite 
mind.    Consider  the  principle  of  compensation  in  nature.    If 


PROSPECTIVE   CONTRIVANCES   OF  ANIMALS.       75 

we  take  the  elephant,  we  iind  that  his  short,  unwieldy  neck 
is  compensated  for  by  a  long  and  highly  flexible  proboscis, 
by  which  the  food  is  secured.  The  crane  kind,  who  live  in 
the  water,  and  secure  from  this  element  their  food,  having  no 
web  feet,  have  instead  long  legs  for  wading  and  long  bills  for 
grasping.  The  spider,  without  wings  to  flj',  and  yet  who  lives 
upon  insects,  has  a  web  as  a  compensating  contrivance.  The 
lobster,  so  singular  in  construction,  unable,  like  other  animalr-, 
to  grow  by  the  gradual  expansion  of  the  skin  with  the  rest  of 
the  body,  casts  otf  at  proper  periods  its  old  coat  of  shell, 
and  slipping  his  feet  out  of  their  bony  incasement  as  a  man 
takes  off  his  boots,  in  this  way  secures  the  same  purpose  of 
growth  that  other  animals  do  by  a  method  entirely  different. 

Birds  have  no  teeth,  but  how  can  graminivorous  and  her- 
bivorous birds  live  ?  They  may  be  said  to  carry  about  with 
them  a  coffee-mill  in  their  gizzards.  So  constructed  is  the 
gizzard  that  it  breaks  and  grinds  the  food  as  effectually  as  a 
mill.  Now  the  gastric  juice,  by  experiment,  is  found  not  to 
operate  upon  the  whole  grain,  even  when  softened  by  water, 
but  only  when  broken  into  fragments.  Without  this  peculiar 
apparatus  the  chicken  would  starve  upon  a  heap  of  corn. 
How  happens  it  that  gizzard  and  bill  go  together,  and  that 
the  gizzard  is  never  found  where  there  are  teeth  ? 

It  is  a  curious  problem  for  the  artist  to  contVive  a  way  of 
locomotion  for  those  animals  who  have  no  feet,  but  a  design- 
ing mind,  in  reality,  has  secured  that  which  would  puzzle 
the  most  ingenious  to  conceive  of.  Reptiles  reciprocally 
shorten  and  lengthen  the  body  by  means  of  the  joint  action 
of  strings  and  rings,  or  longitudinal  and  annular  fibers. 

"  Contraction  and  expansion,"  says  Paxtou,  "  is  the  mode 
of  progression  in  worms,  but  not  in  reptiles.  In  the  class  of 
serpents,  locomotion  consists  simply  of  repeated  horizon- 
tal undulations,  viz.,  flexion  and  extension.  Thus,  the  head 
being  the  fixed  point,  the  body  and  tail  assume  several 
curves;  the  curvatures  are  straightened,  and  thus  the  animal 
advances  with  serpentine  motion.  By  alternating  it  moves 
forward  at  each  step  nearly  the  length  of  the  whole  body, 
the  ribs  having  nothing  to  do  with  locomotion  unless  as 
affbrdins:  a  fulcrum  for  the  muscles." 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE    SENSES. 

The  senses  are  to  be  looked  upon  as  the  instruments  of 
the  mind.  They  are  the  tools  with  which  the  mind  in  a 
material  organism  works.  The  senses  are  also  most  inti- 
mately connected  wdth  the  nervous  system.  Through  the 
medium  of  the  nerves  the  senses  peculiarly  act.  Observe, 
then,  the  intricate  relationship  which  the  senses  sustain  to 
the  nerves,  and  the  nerves  to  the  mind.  Whenever  we 
hear  a  sound,  or  perceive  an  object,  three  things  are  neces- 
sary: the  senses,  the  nerves,  and  the  mind.  Thus,  while  we 
are  able  to  trace  some  of  the  steps  by  which  the  nervous 
system  acts,  through  the  agency  of  the  senses,  we  are  wholly 
incompetent  to  understand  anything  of  the  deep  mystery  of 
the  connection  of  the  nerves  with  animal  life  and  mind. 
From  the  effects  produced,  we  know  that  nerves  are  not 
mind,  any  more  than  mind  is  the  live  senses.  Thus,  with 
three  distinct  agencies,  material  and  immaterial,  we  have  to 
do  with  the  external  world.  How  could  any  principle  of 
generation,  or  law  of  nature,  ever  produce  three  agencies  so 
intimately  connected  together  and  yet  so  distinct  from  each 
other?  Mechanism  so  profoundly  adapted  to  the  external 
world,  and  so  wonderfully  associated  with  mind !  Observe 
that  the  world  within  and  the  world  without  are  so  adapted 
to  each  other  that,  in  a  healthy  state  of  the  material  organ- 
ism, our  mental  ideas  exactly  correspond  with  the  actual 
realities. of  things.  Ingenious  philosophy  has  disputed  this; 
but  all  the  laws  of  common  sense  and  human  belief  never 
for  a  moment  have  questioned  this  great  truth.  When  we 
see  a  great  mountain,  and  climb  its  lofty  summit,  our  mental 
idea  of  an  actual  mountain,  and  not  an  imaginary  one,  gives 
us  the  precise  truth  of  a  positive  outward  existence  of  this 
(76) 


THE  SENSES.  77 

mountain,  of  which  the  ideal  conception  is  the  faithful  pic- 
ture. Thus,  by  the  most  clear  law  of  our  nature,  the  senses, 
as  exercised  in  their  appropriate  sphere,  with  opportunity  for 
action  and  healthy  condition  of  the  nervous  system,  never 
can  deceive  us.  Millions  may  be  ignorant  of  the  adjustment 
of  these  instruments  to  the  external  world;  they  may  be  able 
to  describe  nothing  of  the  actual  mechanism  and  the  mu- 
tual dependence  of  one  sense  upon  another,  and  yet  there 
is  not  one  mind  capable  of  intelligent  thought  that  knows 
not  and  feels  that  the  senses  are  precisely  adjusted  to  the 
world  without,  that  their  mechanism  is  the  most  elaborate, 
and  such  as  cannot  be  imitated  by  the  highest  stretch  of  hu- 
man ingenuity.  All  can  tell  the  use  of  the  microscope,  or 
the  telescope,  even  if  few  can  give  a  good  description  of 
them.  All  know  that  these  instruments  are  the  work  of 
intelligence ;  but  when  we  contemplate  the  senses,  we  con- 
sider not  dead  mechanism,  not  merely  living  mechanism, 
but  mechanism  in  connection  with  the  mind,  that  may  well 
be  called  thinking  mechanism.  Here  is  a  step  to  show  a  de- 
signing God,  far  in  advance  of  the  common  argument  of  a 
watch,  with  the  wheels  in  motion,  so  celebrated  in  the 
masterly  treatise  of  Paley.  It  is  because  these  instruments 
of  the  senses  feel  and  taste  and  hear  and  smell  and  see.  It 
is  because  these  senses,  in  their  connection  with  mind,  in- 
troduce us  into  the  glorious  harmonies  of  the  universe,  and 
open  up  the  majestic  movements  of  countless  worlds,  and 
give  the  consciousness  of  the  deep  beauty  of  nature,  that  we 
see  so  clearly  the  proof  of  a  God. 

"  What  is  termed  the  structure  of  the  organs  of  sense," 
says  Sir  Charles  Bell,  "  is  that  apparatus  by  which  the  ex- 
ternal impression  is  conveyed  in  words,  and  by  which  its 
force  is  concentrated  on  the  extremity  of  the  nerve.  The 
mechanism  by  which  their  external  organs  are  suited  to 
their  offices  is  highly  interesting;  it  serves  to  show  (in  a 
way  that  is  level  to  our  comprehension  as  most  resembling 
things  of  human  contrivance)  the  design  with  which  the 
fabric  is  constructed.  Thus  the  eye  is  so  seated  and  so 
formed  as  to  embrace  the  greatest  possible  field  of  vision. 


78  THE  SENSES. 

We  can  understand  the  happy  effects  of  the  convexity  of  the 
transparent  cornea,  the  influence  of  the  humors  of  various 
densities  acting  like  an  achromatic  telescope;  we  can  admire 
the  precision  with  which  the  rays  of  light  are  concentrated 
on  the  retina,  and  the  beautiful  provision  for  enlarging  or 
diminishing  the  pencil  of  light  in  proportion  to  its  intensity ; 
but  all  this  explains  nothing  in  respect  to  the  perception  that 
is  excited  in  the  mind  by  the  impulse  on  the  extremity  of 
the  nerve.  In  like  manner  in  the  complex  apparatus  of  the 
eye,  we  see  how  this  organ  is  formed,  with  reference  to  a 
double  course  of  impressions,  as  they  come  through  the 
solids,  or  through  the  body,  and  as  they  come  through  the 
atmosphere;  we  comprehend  how  the  undulations  and  vi- 
brations of  the  air  are  collected  and  concentrated ;  how  they 
are  directed  through  the  intricate  passages  of  the  bone,  to  a 
fluid  in  which  the  nerve  of  hearing  is  suspended ;  and  we 
see  how  at  last  that  nerve  is  moved,  but  we  can  comprehend 
uothino^  more  from  the  studv  of  the  external  organ  of 
hearing." 

It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  into  a  description  in  detail  of 
the  separate  senses  of  the  body.  So  many  and  accurate 
have  been  the  illustrations  by  the  anatomist  of  the  senses, 
that  it  would  be  doing  the  greatest  injustice  to  the  senses  to 
give  a  hasty  sketch  of  them.  For  the  purpose  of  our  ar- 
gument, it  is  quite  enough  to  state  facts  which  all  admit.  Of 
all  the  senses,  that  of  the  eye  presents  itself  as  the  most  elab- 
orate work  of  art.  Protected  by  a  bony  socket,  with  its  three 
humors,  its  transparent  cornea,  its  concave  retina,  and  moved 
by  six  muscles  in  every  direction  needed,  with  a  power  of 
adjusting  itself  to  near  or  distant  objects,  it  shows  itself  pre- 
cisely adapted  to  the  rays  of  light,  and  all  the  diversity  of 
spheres  in  which  it  is  called  to  act.  Xo  matter  what  may  be 
the  peculiarity  shown  in  the  elements  of  air,  earth,  or  water, 
the  eyes  of  all  animals  are  exactly  adapted  to  the  wants  of 
every  creature.  Thus  the  eagle,  that  soars  in  the  air,  has 
an  eye  unlike  that  of  man,  and  yet  neither  could  exchange 
places  without  the  greatest  detriment.  The  eye  of  the  fish 
is  useless  out  of  the  element  of  water;  but  in  that  element 


THE  SENSES.  79 

subserving  all  the  demands  of  the  tishy  race.  In  those  ex- 
treme circumstances  where  the  eye  is  not  needed,  we  do 
not  find  the  eye.  Thus  eyeless  fish  are  taken  from  the  dark 
waters  of  the  Mammoth  Cave  of  Kentucky.  Here  was  a 
sphere  where  no  eye  was  wanted,  for  in  the  perpetual  ab- 
sence of  light  the  Q\Q  is  useless.  Could  it  be  chance  that 
made  some  fish  eyeless  and  other  fish  with  ej-es  ?  Is  there 
not  as  much  intelligence  seen  in  adapting  circumstances  to 
the  eye  as  in  the  making  of  the  eye  itself?  The  precision 
with  which  objects  and  colors  are  delineated  upon  the  retina 
is  very  wonderful.  Thus  the  retina  of  the  eye  is  a  constant 
and  ever-changing  panorama  of  the  outward  world,  with  all 
its  varied  scenery. 

"  Could  a  painter,"  says  Dr.  Dick,  "  after  a  long  series  of 
ingenious  efl:brts,  delineate  the  extensive  landscape  now 
before  me  on  a  piece  of  paper  not  exceeding  the  size  of 
a  silver  sixpence,  so  that  every  object  might  be  as  distinctly 
seen  iu  its  proper  shape  and  color  as  it  now  appears  when  I 
survey  the  scene  around  me,  he  would  be  incomparably 
superior  to  all  the  masters  of  his  art  that  ever  went  before 
him.  This  effect,  which  far  transcends  the  utmost  efforts  of 
human  genius,  is  accomplished  in  a  moment  in  millions  of 
instances  by  the  hand  of  nature,  or,  in  other  words,  by  'the 
finger  of  God.'  All  the  objects  I  am  now  surveying,  com- 
prehending an  extent  of  a  thousand  square  miles,  are  accu- 
rately delineated  in  the  bottom  of  my  eye  on  a  space  less 
than  half  an  inch  in  diameter." 

Volumes  could  be  written  upon  the  five  senses — of  vsight, 
hearing,  touch,  taste,  and  smelling — in  their  relation  to  the 
external  world,  and  the  theme  not  be  exhausted.  If  through 
the  eye,  as  an  instrument  of  the  body,  such  necessities  are 
relieved  and  such  pleasure  secured ;  if  in  relation  to  man 
such  ideas  are  awakened  by  this  miracle  of  art,  equally  true 
is  it  that  the  other  senses  perform  offices  as  pleasant  and 
essential  to  the  welfare  of  the  body.  Take  away  hearing, 
and  w^hat  a  void  is  made  in  human  existence !  Take  away 
touch  or  taste,  and  what  a  blank  is  made  in  the  happiness 
of  creatures!    By  the  senses  the  world  without  us  is  brought 


80  THE  SENSES. 

into  intimate  .  sympathy  with  the  world  within  us.  The 
senses  unite  us  to  both.  Upon  the  mode  of  their  union  im- 
penetrable mystery  rests.  But  one  truth  is  clear :  the  senses 
are  only  instruments  of  the  body.  They  do  not  constitute 
in  themselves  any  of  the  phenomena  comprehended  in  the 
language,  sight,  hearing,  touch,  taste,  and  smelling.  Back 
of  the  nerves  lies  that  mysterious  principle  called  animal 
life,  in  connection  with  the  instinct  and  the  mind;  here  re- 
sides the  true  seat  of  the  senses.  The  greatest  wonder  of 
•all  is  that  instinct  and  mind,  as  bound  up  in  animal  life,  can 
bring,  with  these  instruments,  the  world  without  us  into  such 
intimate  sympathy  with  the  internal  part  of  our  nature. 
Thus  the  bird  that  warbles  his  little  song,  the  ocean  with  its 
myriads  of  fish,  the  deer  bounding  over  the  plain,  the  savage 
lion,  the  entombed  remains  of  the  denizens  of  far-distant 
eDOchs  of  time,  and,  above  all,  man  speak  of  God. 

"  The  smallest  dust  which  floats  upon  the  wind 
Bears  the  strong  impress  of  the  eternal  mind; 
In  mystery  round  it,  subtle  forces  roll ; 
And  gravitation  binds  and  guides  the  whole. 
In  every  sand  before  the  tempest  hurled 
Lie  locked  the  powers  which  regulate  a  world, 
And  from  each  atom  human  thought  may  rise 
With  might  to  pierce  the  mysteries  of  the  skies; 
To  try  each  force  which  rules  the  mighty  plan 
Of  moving  planets,  or  of  breathing  man ; 
And  from  the  sacred  wonders  of  each  sod 
Evoke  the  truths,  and  learn  the  power  of  God." 


CHAPTER  IX. 

LIFE     AND     INSTINCT. 

Life  has  been  defined  by  Stahl  to  be  "the  condition  by 
which  a  bod}^  resists  a  natural  tendency  to  chemical  changes, 
such  as  putrefaction."  Humboldt  says  living  bodies  are 
"  those  which,  notwithstanding  the  constant  operation  of 
causes  tending  to  change  their  form,  are  limited  by  a  certain 
inward  pov:>er  from  undergoing  such  changes."  Kant  defines 
life  "as  an  internal  faculty,  producing  change,  motion,  and 
action."  Bichat's  definition  is,  "life  is  the  sum  of  the  func- 
tions by  which  death  is  resisted."  Schmidt  says,  "life  is  the 
activity  of  matter  according  to  laws  of  organization." 

Life  by  materialists  is  the  same  as  organization,  or  is  con- 
founded with  it.  But  is  there  no  difference  between  a  dead 
man  and  a  live  one  ?  And  yet  the  organization  after  death 
is  the  same  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  But  how  different 
the  one  from  the  other !  Life  is  something  superadded  to 
organization ;  a  perfectly  distinct  power.  The  one  is  only 
mechanism  ;  the  other  is  the  mysterious  force  that  makes  the 
mechanism  go  through  with  its  revolutions.  The  machine 
is  good  for  nothing  without  some  power  applied  to  set  it  in 
motion.  Now,  life  is  the  power  that  moves  all  the  wheels  of 
the  animal  economy.  It  is  the  mj'sterious  agency  which,  with 
unintermittent  force,  daily  propels  the  workmanship  of  the 
artist.  Consequently,  a  living  body  reveals  far  more  dis- 
tinctly the  power  of  some  great  architect  than  a  dead  body. 
Observe  this  peculiarity  in  all  living  organisms.  It  is  con- 
stant change  and  constant  motion :  unlike  inorganic  sub- 
stances, tte  condition  of  existence  is  ceaseless  activity.  Sleep 
may  suspend  some  of  the  action  of  the  body;  but  not  for  a 
moment  does  the  blood  cease  to  flow,  or  the  heart  to  beat, 
or  the  inhaling  or  the  exhaling  of  air.  The  laboratory 
within  is   ever  in  constant  activity.     What  is  it  that  thus 

6  (81) 


82  LIFE  AND   INSTINCT. 

keeps  up  the  circulation  of  the  blood,  or  the  breathing  of 
air  ?  It  is  the  animal  life.  Here,  then,  do  we  see  the  con- 
stant play  of  a  force  that,  with  untiring  energy,  sets  in  daily 
movement  all  the  mechanism  of  man.  Here  we  see  the  gen- 
eration of  new  bodies ;  the  wonderful  principle  of  compensa- 
tion, by  which,  when  a  bone  is  broken,  when  a  wound  in  the 
flesh  is  inflicted,  nature  has  ever  in  store  a  new  material  to 
supply  the  loss  or  waste  of  the  old.  A  new  bone  forms  over 
the  fracture,  new  flesh  speedily  restores  the  old,  and  thus  is 
the  body  seen  not  only  capable  of  introducing  types  of  simi- 
lar organization,  but  of  repairing  the  waste  or  injury  inflicted 
upon  the  old.  Now,  life  is  the  direct  opposite  of  chemical 
aflinitj^ :  it  holds  while  the  body  lives ;  wars  with  those  chemi- 
cal laws  that  are  seen  in  inorganic  substances.  Here  are  two 
forces  showing  themselves  in  the  human  body :  that  of  life 
and  that  of  chemical  aflinity  and  change.  Yet  the  latter  is 
restricted  to  its  proper  sphere  as  long  as  life  continues  ;  when 
that  ends,  chemical  laws  begin  their  work  of  change  and  dis- 
solution. If,  now,  there  is  no  power  independent  of  the 
animal  organization,  why  is  it  that  the  first  germs  of  animal 
life,  with  no  appearance  of  an  elaborate  mechanism,  with  not 
the  slightest  indication  of  its  subsequent  state,  should  by 
their  own  inherent  agency  give  birth  not  only  to  the  com- 
plicated machinery  of  the  body,  but  the  mysterious  energy  of 
life  ?  There  is  not  the  slightest  plausibility  in  the  reasoning 
that  confounds  life  with  organization,  and  organization  with 
the  first  germs  of  animals.  If  the  earliest  germs  of  animals 
reveal  not  one  trace  of  mechanism  ;  if  the  elaborate  tissue 
of  bones,  nerves,  muscles,  veins,  and  arteries  is  the  work 
of  a  subsequent  period,  then  this  cannot  be  true.  Equally 
certain  is  it  that  life  and  organization  are  two  distinct  things. 
How  came  the  principle  of  life  to  incorporate  itself  with  the 
human  mechanism  without  a  divine  agency  ?  Animal  life  is 
a  secret  force,  a  mysterious  power,  but  it  is  not  an  intelligent 
force  or  a  reasoning  power.  It  is  not  mind,  it  is  not  instinct, 
it  has  nothing  in  it  that  corresponds  with  thought.  It  is  an 
undefined  agency  that  works  after  its  own  peculiar  laws.  It 
has  its  distinct  sphere  of  movement;  and  yet  how  valueless 


LIFE  AND   INSTINCT.  83 

the  body  without  life !  How  soon  does  its  beautiful  mechanism 
return  to  ruin  without  this  force  applied  to  preserve  it !  What 
is  the  body  without  life  to  animate  it!  We  esteem  the  me- 
chanism of  inorganic  substances,  even  if  the  distribution  of 
force  makes  them  useless.  But  the  dead  mechanism  of  the 
body,  how  fearful  it  is  !  Life,  then,  is  a  principle  as  indispen- 
sable for  the  existence  of  all  animals  as  the  body  itself.  All 
the  amazing  variety  of  instruments  that  the  body  presents 
only  make  more  deplorable  the  ruin  when  the  grand  agency 
of  life  has  departed.  But  if  life  is  such,  did  it  come  by 
chance  into  the  body  ?  If  the  seat  of  life,  its  mode  of  exer- 
cise, its  commencement,  is  an  unscrutable  mystery,  is  there 
any  doubt  of  the  fact  that  life  itself  owes  its  origin  to  the 
mind  of  an  infinitelj^  wise  God  ?  We  judge  of  the  proof  of 
design  and  adaptation  by  the  intricacy  and  multiplicity  of 
the  instruments  that  bring  it  about.  We  consider  the  more 
artistic  the  machine,  the  more  refined  the  different  parts,  the 
more  evidence  there  is  of  a  contriving  mind.  If,  then,  me- 
chanism evinces  contrivance,  does  not  mechanism,  instinct 
with  life,  show  far  more  a  contriving  mind  ?  When  we  con- 
sider the  vast  array  of  instruments,  all  useless  without  life, 
should  we  not  be  more  impressed  with  the  agency  of  God, 
when  the  great  wheel  that  turns  all  the  lesser  ones  begins  to 
move,  and  there  goes  on  in  full  power  the  complicated  econ- 
omy of  physical  existence?  But  life  in  animals  without  instinct 
is  not  of  itself  sufficient  for  continued  existence.  Instinct 
comes  in  as  a  mysterious  force  imparted  by  some  foreign 
agent.  While  life  is  the  condition  of  all  animal  existence, 
instinct  is  the  condition  necessary  to  make  life  of  any  ser- 
vice. We  see  in  animals  not  merely  living  mechanism,  but 
this  mechanism  directed  by  instinct,  enabling  every  creature 
to  fill  the  sphere  of  its  being.  Instinct  is  to  the  external 
world  what  animal  life  is  to  the  body ;  that  which  adapts  the 
body  to  that  which  is  essential  for  continued  being.  ISo  ani- 
mal could  live  but  a  short  time  destitute  of  instinct,  because 
instinct  is  indispensable  as  the  preserver  and  guide  of  animal 
life.  It  stands  as  the  ever-watchful  sentinel  over  the  princi- 
ple of  life  in  the  body.  While  the  sphere  of  life  is  the  body, 
the  sphere  of  instinct  is  the  external  world,  ever  adapting  the 


84  LIFE  AND   INSTINCT. 

animal  life  to  the  conditions  of  the  world  without.  Thus, 
while  life  keeps  the  mechanism  of  the  body  in  due  order  and 
preservation,  instinct  comes  in  to  adapt  this  mechanism  to 
the  outward  relations  of  the  body.  Life,  in  its  agency,  is 
universal ;  instinct  is  particular.  The  reign  of  life  is  inter- 
nal ;  instinct  is  external.  The  one  is  uniform  in  its  action, 
the  other  is  diversified  in  its  agency.  But  instinct  is  distin- 
guished from  mind,  in  that  it  has  no  trace  of  reason  or  con- 
science. Instinct  never  thinks :  it  acts.  It  is  a  mysterious 
faculty  implanted  to  subserve  certain  indispensable  ends  in 
creation.  Animals  must  live  ;  they  must  be  able  to  provide 
for  the  wants  of  their  offspring,  or  all  animal  existence  would 
cease.  Now,  instinct  is  given  to  attain  with  unerring  cer- 
tainty the  indispensable  ends  of  animal  life.  In  many  re- 
spects we  see  in  it  a  marked  diiference  from  the  human  mind. 
In  the  first  place,  instinct  is  incapable  of  improvement.  It 
exists  as  perfect  in  animals  in  one  age  as  in  another.  Cen- 
turies neither  alter  it  nor  improve  it.  The  bee  is  as  wise  now 
as  a  thousand  years  ago.  The  ant  builds  no  better  houses 
now  than  when  first  created.  The  nest  that  the  bird  pro- 
vides for  her  young  is  precisely  alike,  so  far  as  material  and 
dexterity  is  concerned,  at  one  period  as  at  another.  There 
is  no  such  thing  as  improvement  in  instinct:  however  it 
may  develop  itself  in  each  species  of  animals,  it  is  always  pre- 
cisely the  same.  But  another  peculiarity  is  seen  in  instinct 
to  distinguish  it  from  reason.  Instinct  jumps  at  one  bound 
into  perfection :  it  is  as  good  in  the  first  stages  of  it  as  the 
last.  As  soon  as  it  can  fairly  develop  itself,  it  is  of  its  kind 
perfect  for  the  end  designed.  Thus,  the  young  duck  takes  as 
readily  to  the  water  as  the  old  duck.  The  young  beaver 
appears  as  wise  in  architecture  as  the  old  beaver.  The  young 
bee  fabricates  a  cell  with  as  much  geometrical  precision  as 
the  old  bee.  The  first  efforts  of  instinct  are  as  well  directed 
as  the  last.  How  different  from  reason  !  Feebler  in  its  com- 
mencement than  instinct,  it  gradually  expands,  grows  more 
perfect  with  the  flight  of  time,  and  in  its  highest  maturity 
looks  upward  with  longing  eyes  to  yet  nobler  heights  of  ex- 
cellence !  But  instinct  also  is  extremely  limited  in  its  range; 
it  only  takes  in  few  ends.     It  never  goes  out  of  a  prescribed 


LIFE  AND   INSTINCT.  85 

circle.  ]S[ot  more  uuiformlj  do  the  planets  move  in  their  des- 
tined circuits,  than  does  instinct  move  in  its  allotted  sphere. 
Another  peculiarity  of  instinct  is,  that  it  bears  the  clearest 
possible  mark  of  a  foreign  agency.  The  accuracy  of  instinct 
is  an  imparted  accuracy ;  some  infinitely  higher  power  than 
the  animal  gives  instinct.  How  can  it  be  otherwise  ?  Does 
a  person  believe  that  the  young  crocodile,  that  takes  to  the 
water  as  soon  as  it  leaves  the  Qgg,  has  any  thought  or  design 
about  water  ? — that  the  bee,  which  builds  a  cell  more  perfect 
than  the  art  of  man  can  imitate,  does  so  as  the  result  of  study 
or  of  experience  ? — that  the  nest  of  the  bird  is  fashioned  by 
reason  ?  Does  it  enter  tlie  head  of  a  man  that  what  human 
reason  or  experience  blunders  in,  animal  thought  perfects 
itself  in  ?  No  !  Instinct  is  a  mysterious  power  communi- 
cated by  God,  that,  blindly,  yet  with  absolute  certainty,  impels 
the  animal  to  certain  wise  ends.  The  toil  of  learning  may 
do  for  reason,  but  instinct  has  no  time  for  it.  Is  there  not 
then  the  highest  proof  of  a  designing  mind,  that  what  the 
animal  left  to  itself  would  be  utterly  incapable  of  attaining 
unto  by  thought  or  experience,  instinct  secures  immediatelj', 
and  when  in  the  highest  degree  needed  ?  Is  it  thought  that 
leads  the  bird  to  meditate  upon  the  wants  of  her  future  off- 
spring, and  leave  the  habit  of  ceaseless  activity  for  the  long, 
the  inactive  process  of  sitting  upon  her  eggs  ?  Yet  we  see, 
without  the  slightest  trace  of  reason,  an  end  secured  as  wise 
as  if  the  bird  had  been  endowed  with  the  intelligence  of  a 
Newton.  How  came  the  faculty  of  instinct  in  animals,  if  God 
did  not  give  it  ?  Can  it  for  a  moment  be  presumed  that  the 
animal  originated  by  any  powers  of  his  own  instinct  ? — 
that,  without  thought  or  any  knowledge  of  his  subsequent 
wants,  he  yet  devised  a  facult}^  that  in  its  appropriate  sphere 
was  better  than  the  highest  reason  ? 

How  came  an  animal  "without  foresight  to  get  up  some- 
thing for  certain  ends  better  even  than  the  most  disciplined 
reason  could  secure?  How  came  such  matchless  subser- 
viency to  contain  few  but  most  wise  ends,  to  come  from  a 
source  where  experience  was  impossible  and  thought  alto- 
gether out  of  the  question?  Does  not  instinct,  equally  with 
life,  reveal  the  agency  of  an  infinite  God? 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE    HUMAN   BODY   AND   MIND,  AND    THE   TESTIMONY   OF  HISTORY 
AND    SCIENCE    UPON    THE    ORIGIN    OF    MAN. 

Man  is  a  complex  machine,  comprehending  organized 
matter,  life,  and  mind.  The  human  form  embodies  a  three- 
fold union,  not  more  mysterious  in  principle  than  complex 
in  construction.  Man  himself  is  a  miracle  of  art.  It  may 
appear  a  small  thing  to  stand  upon  the  feet;  but  the  most 
perfect  statue  cannot  thus  do :  the  slightest  wind  will  over- 
turn it;  and  yet  with  what  ease  and  safety  a  man  stands 
erect  or  walks  the  earth !  Now,  then,  the  diiFerent  postures 
of  man  are  owing  to  the  imperceptible  yet  constant  balanc- 
ing of  the  body  by  the  muscles.  One  of  the  hardest  works 
of  art  is  to  make  both  sides  of  the  body  and  head  alike, — one 
precisely  resembling  the  other.  And  yet  how  uniform  and 
exact  the  proportions  of  the  human  frame  !  Of  the  millions 
who  compose  the  human  family,  no  two  persons  can  be 
found  having  exactly  the  same  features.  Thus,  while  in  all 
essential  respects  there  runs  through  the  whole  race  one 
great  principle  of  resemblance ;  yet  there  is  diversity  of 
feature  enough  alwaj^s  to  distinguish  one  man  from  another. 
Observe  the  regularity  of  the  animal  structure.  While  ex- 
ternally there  is  the  most  perfect  resemblance  in  the  limbs 
in  opposite  sides  of  the  body,  while  there  is  exact  correlation 
of  parts,  yet  internally  this  is  far  from  being  the  case.  A 
line  drawn  down  the  middle  of  the  breast  divides  the  thorax 
into  two,  similar  in  all  respects;  yet  the  two  sides  inclose 
very  different  contents.  The  heart  lies  on  the  left  side,  and 
a  lobe  of  lungs  on  the  right,  balancing  each  other  neither  in 
size  nor  shape.  Thus  the  external  proportion  in  this  and 
other  parts  of  the  body  does  not  arise  from  any  equality  in 
the  shape  or  contents  of  the  internal  body.  One  great  per- 
fection in  the  animal  mass  is  package.  Observe  the  variety 
and  number  of  instruments  all  securely  stowed  away  in  the 
(86) 


THE  HUMAN  BODY  AND   MIND.  87 

most  convenieut  compass !  Here  at  the  center  is  the  heart, 
pumping  at  the  rate  of  eighty  strokes  in  a  minute ;  here 
are  two  difterent  sets  of  pipes,  one  carrying  the  blood  from 
the  heart,  the  other  returning  it  to  the  heart ;  here  are  the 
lungs  distending  and  contracting  their  thousands  of  vesicles 
by  constant  reciprocation ;  here  is  the  powerful  chemistry  of 
the  stomach,  with  the  bowels  silently  propelling  the  changed 
aliments ;  here  are  the  liver,  the  kidneys,  the  pancreas,  the 
parotid,  all  performing  their  peculiar  office ;  here  is  the  in- 
testinal canal,  five  times  the  length  of  the  body,  so  important 
in  the  animal  economy,  securely  protected  by  being  knit  to 
the  edge  of  a  broad,  flat  membrane,  called  the  mesentery ; 
here  is  the  brain,  incased  in  bone,  the  spinal  marrow  so  deli- 
cate, secured  from  injury  by  the  wonderful  mechanism  that 
surrounds  it.  And  yet  with  so  many  movements  and  offices, 
with  such  diversity  of  construction  and  position,  such  peculi- 
arities of  exercise,  this  living  mass  of  heterogeneous  sub- 
stances and  motions  always  keep  in  their  respective  spheres. 
Man,  unconscious  of  the  mechanism  within,  moves  through 
life;  day  and  night  does  he  carry  about  a  laboratory,  where 
nature  performs  her  mysterious  work,  and  existence  passes 
away  through  innumerable  diversities  of  operation.  Thus 
the  body  is  a  moving  machinery,  so  compact,  so  beneficently 
arranged,  that  the  flight  of  years  and  the  changing  seasons 
do  but  evince  a  stronger  proof  of  an  origin  from  an  all-wise 
mind.  Observe  also  the  beauty  of  the  body.  An  infinite 
taste,  a  refinement  of  art,  transcending  all  description,  has 
fashioned  the  human  frame,  has  painted  with  hues  more  ex- 
pressive than  the  rainbow  the  face  of  man,  throwing  into 
every  feature  the  passions  of  the  soul,  giving  to  every  move- 
ment propriety  and  grace,  and  revealing  in  every  lineament 
the  impress  of  mind.  Thus,  if  so  decisive  the  evidence  of 
design  in  the  body  of  man,  much  more  clear  is  that  evidence 
in  the  soul  or  the  intellect  of  man.  It  is  man,  as  compounded 
of  the  material  and  the  immaterial,  that  demonstrates  the 
handiwork  of  God  with  absolute  certainty.  Give  to  matter 
all  the  powers  you  please,  none  so  wild  as  to  imagine  it  ever 
can    originate    will,    perception,    imagination,    reason,   con- 


88  THE  HUMAN  BODY  AND   MIND, 

science,  and  affection.  These  are  the  attributes  alone  of  the 
mind;  they  have  no  affinity,  no  likeness  to  the  properties 
of  matter. 

"  Clay  cannot  cogitate,"  says  Felling,  "  nor  can  any  mov- 
ing wheel  reason,  nor  can  the  most  spirituous  parts  of  the 
blood  'philosophize,  nor  can  the  finest  motes  that  dance  in  the 
sun  consult  or  deliberate;  nor  can  that  glorious  and  enliven- 
ing creature,  the  sun  itself,  entertain  those  meditations  w^hich 
bubble  and  spring  out  of  one's  mind ;  nor  can  all  the  ma- 
terial parts  of  the  world  put  together  form  those  contrivances, 
desires,  and  affections  which  are  the  operations  of  the  hu- 
man soul;  and  to  suppose,  as  some  pretenders  to  sense  and  wit 
do,  that  all  these  actions  proceed  from  little  restless  atoms 
capering  about  4n  the  head,  and  falling  accidentally  into 
various  forms  and  contextures,  doth  argue  rather  that  the 
brains  of  such  men  are  infested  with  flies  and  nits,  than  that 
they  understand  anything  of  right  reason  and  philosophy." 

Upon  no  one  subject  is  history  more  agreed  than  in  fixing 
some  few  thousand  years  ago  a  beginning  to  the  human 
species.  No  nation  so  savage,  none  so  dark  as  to  believe 
that  the  human  race  existed  from  eternity.  Consult  all 
Roman  or  Grecian  poetry,  study  the  legends  of  all  the  sages 
of  Eastern  literature,  investigate  all  the  books  of  heathen 
philosophy,  and  among  them  all  the  one  great  fact  is  recog- 
nized,— the  creation  at  some  time  of  man.  This  fact,  what- 
ever may  be  the  obscurity  or  contradiction  respecting  the 
mode  of  it  or  the  time,  runs  through  all  tradition,  it  inter- 
weaves itself  in  all  ancient  philosophy  and  poetry.  That 
some  thousand  years  ago  man  had  an  origin  is  recorded  in 
the  written  and  the  unwritten  language  of  all  nations  upon 
the  face  of  the  earth.  The  golden  age  of  man,  his  once 
primeval  innocence,  with  the  brazen  and  iron  age  that  suc- 
ceeded, is  pictured  forth  in  all  the  poetry  and  philosophy  of 
the  world.  No  matter  how  confused  the  notions  in  respect 
to  the  fall  of  man,  most  clearly  is  the  fact  made  known  of  the 
existence  of  the  first  man.  So  far  as  the  voice  of  history, 
sacred  and  profane,  is  concerned,  we  cannot  doubt  that  there 
was  a  time  when  the  human  race  had  a  beorinnino^.  Science 
unites  her  voice  with  history  to  confirm  the  fact  of  man's 


AND    THE   ORIGIN  OF  MAN.  89 

origiu.  The  records  of  all  investigations  among  the  monu- 
ments of  antiquity  point  to  the  central  region  of  Asia,  whence 
anciently  proceeded  the  descendants  of  Shem,  Ham,  and 
Japheth.  Here  was  the  cradle  of  the  human  race,  here  origi- 
nated the  three  great  streams  of  population  from  the  three 
sons  of  iToah.  Tradition,  even  as  the  Bible,  teaches  ps  that 
the  deluge  destroyed  a  corrupt  race  of  men,  who  were  the 
descendants  of  that  happy  pair  that  once  lived  in  a  state  of 
innocence.  Science  makes  known  to  us  that,  among  the  re- 
mains of  the  extinct  species  of  animals  that  lie  entombed  in 
the  earth,  there  are  no  vestiges  of  man  among  the  earliest 
species  of  fish,  reptiles,  birds,  and  quadrupeds.  If  man  had 
existed  from  eternity,  why  so  recent  and  late  the  records  of 
his  being?  Why  do  we  not  at  least  find  his  remains  among 
the  earlier  species  of  fish,  birds,  and  quadrupeds?  So  far 
as  the  investigations  of  geology  go,  they  are  all  opposed  to 
the  eternity  of  the  human  race.  Geology  discloses  to  us  the 
fact  that  the  human  remains  are  the  last  and  the  most 
recent,  while  other  races  of  organized  creatures  existed  be- 
fore. History  and  science  testify  to  the  comparatively  recent 
origin  of  man.  The  Bible  record  of  man's  creation  is  con- 
firmed 'by  history  and  science.  If,  then,  we  look  to  the 
origin  of  man  simply  as  a  fact  to  be  established  by  testi- 
mony, there  will  be  found  a  weight  of  evidence  that  man 
came  from  the  creative  power  of  God  vastly  greater  than  we 
can  adequately  conceive  of,  so  that  not  only  the  first  link  in 
the  great  chain  of  humanity,  but  every  link  in  that  chain, 
viewed  separately  or  collectively,  point  to  the  infinite  mind. 
"  Humanity  proper,"  says  Professor  Tayler  Lewis,  "  or  the 
human  proprium,  did  not  grow,  was  no  work  of  nature,  but 
had  a  divine,  a  supernatural,  an  instantaneous  beginning. 
There  was  a  time,  a  moment,  when  man, —  a  man, — the 
jmmus  homo,  began  to  be,  who  a  moment  before  was  not. 
There  was  one  in  whom  humanity  commenced,  and  from 
whom  all  subsequent  humanity  has  been  derived.  There 
was  one  who  first  began  to  be  a  man,  and  this  principium 
has  its  date  from  the  first  energizing  of  that  higher  life, 
which  came  from  a  direct  inbreathing  of  the  Almighty  and 
Everlasting  Father  of  Spirits." 


CHAPTER   XL 

COMPARATIVE    PHYSIOLOGY,  AND    PHYSICAL    GEOGRAPHY. 

One  of  the  most  significant  indications  not  only  of  design 
in  the  workl,  but  of  a  constant  superintending  Providence, 
is  the  intimate  relation  which  the  inorganic  kingdom  sustains 
to  the  organic,  and  the  adjustment  of  laws  most  opposite  in 
their  character  to  the  general  harmony  of  the  system.  The 
development  theory,  by  ascribing  all  the  inorganic  and  or- 
ganic changes  to  powers  inherent  in  matter,  and  to  a  princi- 
ple of  transmutation,  by  which  one  species  of  vegetables  or 
animals  generates  a  different  species,  and  all  from  a  gradual 
development  through  great  ages  of  time,  has  in  it  nothing 
that  confirms  it  in  nature.  Geology  reveals  how  untrue  this 
theory  is  in  the  past  ages  of  the  world.  Let  us,  then,  as  pe- 
culiarly revealing  the  superintendence  of  God,  notice  some 
of  those  minute  but  most  important  changes  constantly 
going  on  in  the  world.  As  we  direct  our  inquiries  into  the 
department  of  nature  where  are  made  known  the  first  devel- 
opments of  being,  we  are  most  forcibly  impressed  with  the 
absurdity  not  only  of  a  theory  which  denies  distinct  creations 
to  distinct  species,  but  which,  under  the  vague  phraseology 
of  general  law,  dispenses  with  the  necessity  of  an  overruling 
Providence.  The  microscope  reveals  to  us  the  forms  of  the 
globules  of  blood  in  herbivorous  and  carnivorous  animals. 
Now  these  globules  diflfer  in  form  and  number  according  to 
the  character  of  the  animal.  In  man,  the  globules  are  small 
and  nearly  circular  ;  the  globules  are  larger  and  of  an  oblong 
spheroidal  form  in  fishes  and  birds.  The  form  is  different 
and  still  larger  in  reptiles.  The  form  of  the  globules  of  blood 
is  also  marked  in  the  grand  orders  of  the  herbivorous  and 
graminivorous  animals.  Upon  this  wholly  arbitrary  distinc- 
tion in  the  form  and  number  of  globules  depends  the  vital 
(90) 


COMPARATIVE  PHYSIOLOGY,  ETC.  91 

eners^y.  Should  an  animal  be  bled  to  syncope,  and  the  blood 
be  permitted  to  flow  on,  death  will  ensue ;  but  if  the  same 
kind  of  blood  taken  from  another  animal  be  injected  into  the 
veins,  the  animal,  if  not  dead,  will  recover  ;  but  the  blood  of 
the  herbivorous  animal  cannot  answer  for  injection  into  the 
carnivora.  Thus  wdiile  dissimilar  globules  have  power  to 
rouse  the  animal  for  a  short  time,  the  animal  cannot  recover. 
Here  we  see  in  the  rudimentary  particles  of  the  body  a  dis- 
tinction upon  which  life  itself  depends.  If,  then,  according 
to  the  development  theory,  the  blood  had  been  transmitted 
from  one  animal  to  another  of  different  species,  the  blood 
would  have  changed  its  primary  character.  In  vegetable 
cells  or  utricles,  there  is  the  same  diversity  of  form  as  in 
the  globules  of  the  blood.  Thus  the  cells  are  oval,  round,  or 
lengthened,  and  sharpened  at  both  ends,  or  they  assume 
tube-like  forms. 

"  Observation,"  says  M.  Jussieu,  "  which  proves  the  truth 
of  theories,  determines  the  contrary  on  watching  the  devel- 
opment of  a  vessel.  We  do  not  find  any  one  which,  in  its 
different  phases,  would  have  represented  all  the  other  kinds 
of  vessels ;  and  the  same  thing  may  be  said  of  cells.  Remark, 
moreover,  first,  that  in  each  part  of  a  plant,  such  and  such 
modifications  of  cells,  of  fibers,  of  vessels  are  found.  We 
have,  for  instance,  in  certain  places,  unrollable  tracheae, 
though  in  others  we  never  meet  with  them  ;  second,  that  in 
spite  of  the  similarity  of  the  chemical  composition  of  the 
walls,  that  of  their  contents  is  quite  different,  and  like  the 
shape  constant  in  appearance,  and  agreeing  with  the  place 
w^hich  the  cavity  occupies  in  the  vegetable.  Thus,  therefore, 
if  all  the  elementary  organs  of  vegetables  commence  their 
growth  as  utricles,  among  which  we  cannot  discover  any  ap- 
preciable difference,  except  in  their  form,  it  is  no  less  true 
that  each  utricle  is  destined  from  the  beginning  to  assume  in 
its  ulterior  development  such  a  form  and  no  other ;  or  to 
elaborate  such  a  substance  and  no  other :  it  is  not,  therefore, 
the  same  organ." 

Most  appropriately  is  it  remarked  by  George  Taylor, 
"  There  must  be  something  in  the  embryo  which  gives  di- 


92  COMPARATIVE  PHYSIOLOGY, 

rection  to  the  individual  growth,  or  there  is  an  infinite  power 
presiding  over  the  development  growth  of  each  one.  This 
position  proves  the  immediate  interposition,  as  well  as  the 
omnipresence  of  the  supreme  cause ;  and  the  former  estab- 
lishes the  distinct  and  unchangeable  character  of  each  class. 
One  of  these  positions  must  be  correct ;  and  as  both  of  them 
contradict  the  idea  of  transmutation  or  development,  it  is  not 
important  which  one  we  force  our  antagonists  to  accept." 
Sajs  Agassiz,  "  We  know  that  one  sort  of  an  egg  will  only 
give  rise  to  one  sort  of  an  animal,  therefore  we  must  admit 
that  as  an  egg  of  one  kind  gives  rise  only  to  one  sort  of  an 
animal,  there  must  be  an  immaterial  principle  presiding 
over  these  changes,  which  is  invariable  in  its  nature,  and  is 
properly  the  cause  of  the  whole  process." 

Consider  the  harmony  existing  between  the  laws  of  heat 
and  light  and  the  vegetable  kingdom.  It  has  been  proved 
that  a  ray  of  solar  light  contains  several  distinct  principles; 
one  portion  represents  color,  another  portion  affects  the  tem- 
perature, while  a  third  contains  the  chemical  principle  which 
is  invisible,  and  has  no  influence  on  the  thermometer.  What 
agency  does  the  action  of  these  distinct  principles  of  a  ray  of 
solar  light  perform  in  vegetation  ?  The  British  Association 
submitted  the  question  to  Mr.  Hunt  for  investigation.  In  his 
report,  he  says  that  light  transmitted  through  yellow^  glass 
has  little  or  no  influence  upon  the  germination  of  seeds,  as 
the  chemical  portion  of  the  ray  does  not  pass  through  that 
color.  Every  vegetable  demands  a  proportion  of  all  these 
principles,  and  cannot  survive  without  a  certain  portion  of 
these  principles.  Thus,  germination,  growth,  and  fructi- 
fication depend  upon  changes  in  the  proportion  of  them. 
These  changes  are  in  harmony  with  the  seasons.  Says  Mr. 
Hunt,  "  It  is  now  an  ascertained  fact  that  the  solar  beam 
during  spring  contains  a  large  amount  of  the  actinic  prin- 
ciple so  necessary  at  that  season  for  the  germination  of 
seeds  and  the  development  of  buds.  In  summer  thei-e  is  a 
large  proportion  of  the  light-giving  principle  necessary  for 
the  formation  of  the  woody  parts  of  the  plant.  As  autumn 
approaches,  the  calorific  or  heat-giving  principles  of  the  solar. 


AND  PHYSICAL   GEOGRAPHY.  93 

ray  increase.  This  is  necessary  to  harden  the  woody  parts, 
and  prepare  them  for  the  approaching  winter.  It  is  thus 
that  the  proportions  of  the  diiferent  principles  are  changed 
with  the  seasons,  and  thus  that  vegetation  is  germinated, 
grown,  and  hardened  by  them." 

In  looking  upon  the  vegetable  kingdom  we  find  that  it 
subserves  to  man  two  great  purposes:  one  that  of  food, 
clothing,  and  protection  from  the  elements ;  the  other  a 
chemical  and  medicinal  end.  We  find  every  country  and 
diversity  of  climate  having  its  distinct  order  of  vegetables. 
Those  vegetables  most  needed  are  most  abundant.  Thus, 
the  cereals  most  useful  are  cultivated  as  far  north  as  the 
seventieth  degree  of  latitude.  In  the  tropics,  the  banana, 
date,  yam,  and  bread-fruit  trees  are  scattered  over  the  whole 
tropical  zone.  We  find  that  ijature  is  one  vast  storehouse 
where  are  deposited  everything  necessary  for  the  support 
of  man.  Unlimited  provision  is  made  to  gratify  the  dif- 
ferent tastes  of  man.  Ornament  is  consulted  as  much  as 
utility.  In  the  chemical  composition  of  the  animal  and  vege- 
table kingdom,  we  see  a  marked  difi'erence.  The  cellular 
mass  of  plants  is  composed  of  nearly  equal  parts  of  carbon, 
hydrogen,  and  oxygen  ;  but  in  animals,  gelatine,  composed 
of  unequal  parts  of  carbon,  hydrogen,  nitrogen,  and  oxygen, 
is  the  primary  material.  Vegetables  in  their  growth  absorb 
inorganic  particles  by  the  extremity  of  their  roots  ;  animals 
feed  upon  organic  particles ;  and  by  the  nervous  and  lymphatic 
vessels  in  the  intestinal  tube  they  absorb  their  nutriment. 
In  animals  and  vegetables  respiration  is  altogether  difterent : 
that  of  animals  is  performed  without  intermission  the  whole 
of  life ;  while  light  is  absolutely  necessary  for  vegetables. 
Wide  as  may  be  the  difiterence  in  respiration  and  nutrition  in 
the  vegetable  and  animal  kingdom,  the  organic  apparatus  is 
even  greater  which  performs  these  functions. 

In  the  physical  geography  of  the  earth,  we  notice  that  a 
large  proportion  of  the  continental  element  lies  north  of  the 
equator.  The  eastern  hemisphere  has  a  much  larger  area  of 
land  than  the  western.  Its  greatest  expansion  is  from  east 
to  west,  while  the  new  continent  has  its  greatest  length  from 


94  COMPARATIVE  PHYSIOLOGY,  ETC. 

north  to  south.  The  northern  continents  contain  nearly  two- 
thirds  of  the  continental  area,  or  about  twenty-two  and  a  half 
millions  of  square  miles,  while  the  southern  contain  sixteen 
and  a  third  millions  only.  The  northern  continents  are  more 
indented  and  articulated,  and  therefore  present  in  their  con- 
tours more  variety :  they  are  also  possessed  of  inland  seas 
and  gulfs ;  while  the  southern  are  more  compact,  have  fewer 
indentations,  and  no  inland  seas.  The  northern  continents 
are  almost  entirely  in  the  temperate  zones;  while  the  southern 
are  confined  to  the  tropical  and  warm  temperate  zones.  The 
mountains,  according  to  their  arrangements,  materially  affect 
the  temperature  of  the  continental  climates.  In  the  old 
world  the  principal  chains  follow  the  direction  of  the  paral- 
lels, while  in  the  new  world  they  take  the  direction  of  the 
meridian.  The  law,  as  in  the  case  of  the  major  axis,  seems 
to  be  entirely  different  in  the  eastern  and  western  continents. 
"The  highest  elevation  of  the  continental  masses,"  says 
George  Taylor,  "following  the  direction  of  the  mountain 
chains,  are  uniformly  located  on  the  sides  of  the  continents, 
and  not  as  might  be  expected  at  the  center.  The  mountains 
descend  gradually  towards  the  Atlantic  and  frozen  oceans ; 
while  their  slopes  are  rapid  and  precipitous  tow^ards  the 
Pacific  and  Indian  oceans." 

"  If  the  order  were  reversed,"  says  Professor  Guyot,  "  and 
the  elevation  of  the  lands  went  on  increasing  toward  the 
north,  the  most  civilized  half  of  the  globe  at  the  present 
would  be  a  frozen  and  uninhabited  desert." 

Thus  we  find,  even  in  the  arrangement  of  the  continents, 
and  the  position  of  the  mountain  ranges,  a  clear  indication 
of  divine  wisdom  and  goodness. 


CHAPTER  XI I. 

MEANING  OF  THE  TERMS  NATURE  AND  CHANCE. 

So  often  and  so  loosely  is  the  word  nature  used,  so  fre- 
quently is  it  misapplied,  that  its  true  import  is  deserving  of 
careful  consideration.  Nature  comprehends  the  universe, 
but  yet  is  used  with  more  peculiar  reference  to  the  objects 
that  come  under  our  immediate  notice  in  the  visible  world. 
But  we  cannot  speak  of  the  powers  of  nature  abstracted  from 
the  individual  objects  of  nature.  ^Nature,  as  the  universe, 
with  which  in  its  largest  acceptation  it  is  synonymous,  is 
made  up  of  parts,  and  these  parts,  however  related  to  each 
other,  are  comprised  in  an  infinite  variety  of  objects.  Thus, 
to  speak  of  nature  in  the  aggregate  as  something  distinct  from 
the  objects  of  nature  is  most  absurd,  and  yet  the  powers  of 
nature  are  often  spoken  of  as  if  something  resided  in  nature  as 
an  original  cause  of  all  things.  When  adaptation  and  design 
are  admitted,  we  often  hear  the  phrase,  nature  itself  is  the  cause. 
But  why  thus  delude  the  mind  with  language  so  wanting  in 
intelligence  and  sense  ?  Why  suffer  the  mind  to  be  deceived 
with  the  jingle  of  words  absolutely  without  meaning  ?  Is 
there  no  distinction  between  the  first  cause  and  second 
causes  ?  Is  there  no  difference  between  original  power  and 
imparted  power  ?  Do  we  speak  of  a  self-active  machine  be- 
cause we  see  the  wheels  move  ?  Do  we  confound  a  landscape 
revealing  a  hundred  tints  of  beauty  upon  the  canvas  with 
the  painter  of  that  canvas  ?  Do  we  admire  the  artistic  Avork 
of  the  statue,  and  lose  sight  of  the  genius  that  fashioned  it  ? 
E'ature  has  numberless  objects,  animate  and  inanimate ;  it  has 
infinite  diversities  of  collocation  and  adjustment,  adaptations 
of  the  utmost  beauty  and  usefulness.  If,  commencing  with 
the  objects  of  the  inanimate  world,  we  ask  how  came  these 
objects  in  existence,  is  it  any  solution  to  the  question  to  say 

(95) 


96  MEANING   OF  THE   TERMS 

nature  brought  them  in  f  But  nature  is  only  an  assemblage  of 
objects.  It  is  no  explanation  to  say  that  the  whole  intro- 
duced the  separate  parts,  that  the  aggregate  of  all  things 
produced  each  separate  member.  The  question  is,  how 
did  each  separate  object,  animate  and  inanimate,  come  into 
being  ?  Not  how  did  the  whole  come  into  being.  The 
question  is,  what  was  the  cause,  the  efficient  author  of  the 
particular  objects  that  sum  up  the  whole  ?  Now  to  shift  the 
proof  from  the  part  to  the  whole  is  poor  logic,  and  worse 
sense.  If  there  is  one  truth  more  self-evident  than  any  other, 
it  is,  that  existence  does  not  prove  self-creation.  Because  / 
am,  it  is  no  proof  that  therefore  I  made  myself.  Because  the 
world  is,  that  does  not  prove  its  self-creation.  But  the  very 
phrase  self-creation  involves  an  absurdit}'.  That  which  is  not, 
cannot  engender  itself.  I  could  not  create  myself  before  I 
had  an  existence,  even  had  I  the  powder  afterwards  of  creat- 
ing a  world.  When  once  it  is  seen  that  existing  things  have 
a  beginning,  then  the  cause  of  that  beginning  must  reside 
out  of  itself.  The  question  then  is,  did  the  separate  objects 
that  go  to  make  up  nature  have  a  beginning  ?  If  so,  then 
nature  in  no  sense  was  the  first  great  cause.  Nature  itself 
must  be  accounted  for  by  a  power  out  of  itself,  and  distinct 
from  itself.  As,  by  separating  the  several  parts  that  go.  to 
make  up  nature,  we  reduce  it  to  nothing,  so  when  we  account 
for  the  separate  things  in  nature,  we  cannot  go  for  their  cause 
to  the  great  whole.  An  aggregate  of  difi'erent  things  is  no 
cause  of  those  things.  Numberless  second  causes  cannot 
do  away  with  the  first  cause.  Thus,  when  nature  is  properly 
viewed,  we  see  the  absurdity  of  making  it  the  cause  of  the 
objects  that  go  to  make  it  up.  As  well  may  a  person  enter 
some  great  palace,  and,  viewing  all  around  its  wonders  of  art, 
its  noble  proportions,  its  lofty  walls,  its  stones  of  polished 
marble,  its  well-formed  windows,  its  walls  decorated  with 
the  richest  paintings,  and  its  numerous  contrivances  of 
comfort  and  elegance,  say  the  palace  is  the  cause  of  all  these 
things.  Is  now  the  reasoning  any  less  sophistical  that  con- 
founds nature  with  the  author  of  nature  ?  Is  it  not  absurd 
to  make  nature  the  cause  of  its  separate  parts,  and  lose  sight 


NATUBE  AND    CHANCE.  97 

of  an  intelligent  cause  that  created  the  whole,  and   each 
member  of  the  whole  ? 

So  much  has  been  said  of  chance  and  of  the  fortuitous 
concourse  of  atoms,  that  in  considering  the  personal  agency 
of  God,  it  would  be  well  to  give  these  phrases  a  passing 
notice.  Whatever  may  be  our  view  of  the  agency  of  God, 
or  his  personal  manifestation  of  power  in  the  works  of  nature, 
one  thing  is  certain, — the  great  law  that  every  event  must 
have  a  cause  embraces  all  actual  events,  all  changes,  all 
modifications  of  matter,  and  all  begun  existences.  Adopt 
either  the  hypothesis  of  no  cause  but  God,  or  that  of  the  first 
cause  and  second  causes,  and  in  either  case  we  are  com- 
pelled to  the  belief  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  chance  or 
a  fortuitous  concourse  of  atoms ;  if  by  either  supposition  we 
mean  causeless  events  or  things,  why  is  the  word  chance 
used  at  all  ?  It  is  simply  a  term  appropriate  to  human 
ignorance.  When  we  speak  of  anything  taking  place  by 
chance,  all  that  is  meant  is,  the  cause  is  unknown  or  the 
thing  or  event  not  directly  the  object  of  our  purpose.  But 
because  in  relation  to  man  in  the  restricted  sphere  of  his 
mind  and  his  thoughts  we  do  not  see  many  things  or  events 
the  objects  of  human  will  or  thought,  yet  everything  is 
caused  as  really  as  the  most  designed  object  of  human  work- 
manship. An  artist  may  chisel  out  a  statue,  but  the  chips  of 
marble  that  lie  like  useless  rubbish  at  his  side,  the  very  dust 
that  floats  in  the  air  are  caused  as  much  as  the  statue  itself. 
Where,  then,  is  the  difference  ?  Simply  here, — in  the  work- 
manship of  the  statuary  the  main  object  of  thought  and  pur- 
pose is  the  due  proportion  of  the  body  chiseled  out  of  the 
marble  :  that  we  say  is  designed,  while  the  dust  and  broken 
fragments  of  marble  are  not  designed.  But  in  what  sense 
are  they  not  designed  ?  Simply  in  the  sense  of  the  statue 
itself.  But  as  necessary  to  that  statue  they  are  designed ; 
they  form  the  balance  of  design,  or,  so  to  speak,  the  residuum 
of  design.  They  are  remotely  objects  of  purpose  and  desire, 
as  the  statue  is  directly  an  object  of  purpose.  So  far  as 
cause  goes  they  are  as  really  caused  as  the  most  perfect  work- 
manship of  man.    But  if  chance  is  so  restricted  in  its  meaning 

7 


98        MEANING  OF  TERMS  NATURE  AND  CHANCE. 

when  applied  to  man,  and  if  in  no  proper  definition  of  the 
term  there  can  be  such  a  thing  as  chance,  more  true  is  it  in  re- 
lation to  God  that  there  can  be  no  chance.  The  mind  of  God 
is  unlimited,  his  wisdom  and  knowledge  as  boundless  as  the 
universe,  his  foresight  extends  to  all  events.  Even  the  for- 
tuities of  existence  are  as  much  under  his  control  and 
knowledge  as  things  that  happen  after  the  most  regular  and 
precise  order. 

The  far-reaching  law  of  cause  and  effect  reigns  in  the  uni- 
verse of  mind  and  matter.  God  alone  is  uncaused,  for  he 
alone  is  self-existent :  he  alone  has  no  beginning  or  end. 
In  him  reside  the  infinite  depths  of  all  causes.  Chance  with 
God  is  impossible,  for  contingencies  are  as  really  under  his 
knowledge  and  direction  as  certainties.  Contingencies  with 
God  when  he  purposes  are  certainties. 


CHAPTER    XII I. 


UNITY    OF    DESIGN    IN    NATURE. 


ITature  reveals  through  her  vast  domain  one  divine  unity 
of  wisdom  and  goodness.  Not  only  the  first  truth  of  phi- 
losophy teaches  us  the  absurdity  of  calling  in  more  than  one 
great  cause  for  the  formation  of  the  universe,  but  the  uni- 
verse itself  carries  with  it  the  essential  mark  of  divine  one- 
ness of  construction.  Every  separate  province  is  intimately 
associated  with  the  collective  whole.  Every  part  seems  to  be 
made  after  one  great  pattern,  and  the  mighty  aggregate,  from 
the  greatest  to  the  least,  appears  to  be  tied  together  by  one 
chain  of  Divine  Providence.  Dividing  the  universe  into 
three  parts,  viz.,  that  which  pertains  to  matter,  that  which 
may  be  included  under  the  endless  developments  of  mind  and 
instinct,  and  that  which  is  comprised  in  the  moral  and  ac- 
countable part  of  our  nature,  and  there  wnll  be  found  running 
through  the  whole  the  clear  trace  of  an  origin  from  one  infi- 
nite source.  iJ^aturalists  have  often  exercised  their  minds  in 
investigating  the  great  dependencies  of  one  part  of  nature 
upon  another;  they  have  found  that,  remove  one  element 
from  the  atmosphere,  or  change  the  constitutional  principles 
of  w^ater,  or  modify  but  a  little  the  external  appearance  of  our 
continents  or  mountains,  or  reverse  their  present  locality,  or 
alter  the  etherial  combination  of  the  solar  ray,  or  remove  any 
of  the  primary  ingredients  of  the  earth,  or  derange  but  ever 
so  little  the  chemical  properties  of  heat,  and  the  result  is  ruin 
to  man  as  he  is  now  constituted.  Changes  that  at  first  sight 
would  appear  unimportant,  would  soon  propagate  their  influ- 
ence by  a  thousand  channels  of  communication,  until  one  wide 
derangement  would  affect  the  whole.  Thus,  to  change  but  a 
few  degrees  the  relative  position  of  the  earth's  axis,  would 
work  an  entire  difference  in  the  climate  and  condition  of  the 

(99) 


100  UNITY  OF  DESIGN  IN  NATURE. 

world.  Tlius,  if  we  look  at  the  world  we  find  air,  heat,  land, 
water,  light,  all  having  towards  each  other  a  relation  so 
peculiar,  that  alter  that  relation  in  the  least  and  the  whole  is 
permanently  deranged.  The  collocations  of  matter,  their 
adjustments  that  show  so  signally  the  wisdom  of  God,  reveal 
also  their  oneness  of  design  and  origin.  Not  only  does  phi- 
losophy teach  us  that  the  supposition  of  more  than  one  great 
cause  is  absurd  and  unnecessary,  but  all  nature  cries  out 
against  a  plurality  of  self-existing  and  independent  deities. 
No  trace  is  there  of  such  an  absurdity  in  nature.  Nature 
points  us  to  one  infinite  God  and  there  leaves  us.  A  plu- 
rality of  Gods  must  all  have  one  design,  or  diflerent  designs. 
All  must  act  in  the  same  way,  or  diflerently.  If  the  latter 
were  the  case,  nature  would  reveal  herself  one  mighty  scene 
of  disorder  and  contradiction.  The  condition  of  nature  would 
be  abnormal,  and  all  sensitive  existence  as  now  constituted 
would  be  impossible :  but  should  the  former  supposition  be 
correct,  then  nature  would  give  the  lie  to  herself,  and  every 
page  of  her  records  would  reveal  one  systematic  deception, 
since  man  would  be  compelled  to  believe  in  one  God  while  in 
reality  there  was  a  plurality  of  Gods.  Such  an  idea  is  to  the 
last  degree  absurd.  Search  through  all  nature,  and  one  vast 
chain  of  dependence  runs  through  the  whole.  One  all-per- 
vading unity  is  seen  from  the  smallest  to  the  greatest.  Thus 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  universe  is  made  up  of  innumerable 
parts  all  linked  together;  one  great  principle  of  gravitation 
reaches  to  the  remotest  star.  In  the  minute,  even  as  in  the 
great  objects  of  nature,  there  is  seen  the  unity  of  God's  work- 
manship. As  we  go  through  the  animal  kingdom  we  find 
that  every  species,  every  great  genus  carries  throughout  one 
uniform  pattern.  Thus  so  marked  is  the  unity  of  design, 
that  having  made  ourselves  familiar  with  any  one  species  of 
animals,  we  shall  find  our  great  end  secured  through  all  the 
diversities  of  this  species. 

"  Ever}'  organized  individual,"  says  Cuvier,  "  forms  an 
entire  system  of  its  own,  all  the  parts  of  which  must  mutually 
correspond  and  concur  to  produce  a  certain  definite  purpose, 
by  reciprocal  reaction,  or  by  combining  towards  the  same 


UNITY  OF  DESIGN  IN  NATURE.  101 

end.  Hence  none  of  these  separate  parts  can  change  their 
forms  without  a  corresponding  change  in  the  other  parts  of 
the  same  animal,  and  consequently  each  of  their  parts,  taken 
separately,  indicates  all  the  other  parts  to  which  it  has  be- 
longed. Thus,  if  the  viscera  of  an  animal  are  so  organized 
as  to  be  fitted  for  the  digestion  of  recent  flesh  only,  it  is  also 
requisite  that  the  jaws  should  be  so  constructed  as  to  fit 
them  for  devouring  prey;  the  claws  must  be  constructed  for 
seizing  and  tearing  it  to  pieces ;  the  teeth  for  cutting  and 
dividing  its  flesh  ;  the  entire  system  of  the  limbs  or  organs  of 
motion  for  the  pursuing  and  overtaking  it ;  and  the  organs 
of  sense  for  discovering  it  at  a  distance.  The  shape  and  the 
structure  of  the  teeth  regulate  the  forms  of  the  claws  ;  so 
that  a  claw,  a  shoulder-blade,  a  condyle,  a  leg  or  arm  bone, 
or  any  other  bone  separately  considered,  enables  us  to  dis- 
cover the  description  of  teeth  to  which  they  have  belonged ; 
and  so  also  reciprocally  we  may  determine  the  forms  of  the 
other  bones  from  the  teeth.  Thus,  commencing  an  investi- 
gation by  a  careful  survey  of  any  one  bone  by  itself,  a  per- 
son who  is  sufliciently  master  of  the  laws  of  organic  struc- 
ture may,  as  it  were,  reconstruct  the  whole  animal  to  which 
that  bone  had  belonged.  The  smallest  fragments  of  bone, 
even  the  most  apparently  insignificant  apophysis,  possess  to 
the  class,  order,  genus,  and  species  of  the  animal  to  which 
it  belonged :  insomuch  that  when  we  find  merely  the  ex- 
tremity of  a  well-preserved  bone,  we  are  able  by  careful 
examination,  assisted  by  analogy  and  exact  comparison,  to 
determine  the  species  to  which  it  once  belonged,  as  certainly 
as  if  we  had  the  entire  animal  before  us." 

Thus  it  will  be  manifest  that  unity  of  design  is  seen  through 
the  whole  animal  kingdom.  There  is  equally  clear  one 
mighty  chain  of  dependence  all  centering  in  one  end.  The 
elements  of  earth,  air,  and  water  are  indispensable  for  the 
vegetable  kingdom,  and  these  three  great  departments  of 
nature  are  so  adjusted  to  each  other,  and  all  so  essential  for 
the  intellectual  and  moral  development  of  man,  that  any 
change,  however  apparently  small,  in  their  relative  position 
would  most  vitally  aftect  the  whole.     So  adjusted  is  one  part 


102  UNITY  OF  DESIGN  IN  NATURE. 

of  the  world  to  another,  and  so  connected  is  one  world  with 
other  worlds  to  their  central  sun,  and  so  associated  is  one 
solar  system  with  another,  that  it  would  seem  that  the  whole 
universe,  with  all  its  countless  worlds  and  revolutions,  was 
constituted  upon  one  mighty  plan  with  a  mutual  connection 
so  intimate  that  everything  not  only  had  its  proper  place, 
but  nothing  could  be  spared  out  of  its  place.  Thus,  be  the 
catastrophes  of  nature  ever  so  great,  these  are  made  to  sub- 
serve purposes  most  wise,  and  even  through  the  greatest 
confusion  are  ordained  to  bring  forth  order  and  beauty. 

But  the  unity  of  God  is  as  clearly  manifest  in  the  intel- 
lectual and  moral  world.  The  world  without  us  is  exactly 
adapted  to  the  world  within  us.  If  God  was  not  wise  and 
good,  this  never  would  have  been  so:  if  there  were  distinct 
and  independent  authors  of  nature,  such  harmony  of  the  ex- 
ternal with  the  internal,  such  order  and  wise  arrangement, 
such  unity  of  end  and  means  never  could  be  expected.  Not 
only  would  there  be  different  plans,  but  discord  in  the  plans  ; 
not  only  would  we  see  no  unity  of  end,  but  great  diversity  of 
end;  least  of  all  should  we  see  the  outward  world  made  to 
correspond  so  exactly  with  the  internal  world,  so  that  each 
should  so  sympathize  together  and  make  both  to  act  in  such 
unison.  The  things  that  are  objective  are  so  bound  up  with 
the  things  subjective,  that  mutual  concord  in  their  normal 
state  ever  exists.  ITot  more  dependent  is  the  body  upon  air, 
water,  and  food  for  life,  than  is  the  intellect  and  moral  na- 
ture dependent  upon  the  external  world  for  development. 
Eemove  the  senses  that  ally  us  with  the  world  without,  and 
what  becomes  of  the  mind  and  heart  existing  in  an  embodied 
condition  in  the  world?  The  partial  derangement  of  the 
senses,  or  the  loss  of  any  one  sense,  shows  to  us  clearly  how 
greatly  fettered  the  mind  is  in  its  exercise.  "Whether  exist- 
ence upon  the  earth  would  be  possible  with  all  the  senses 
removed  is  extremely  questionable.  Certainly,  in  such  an 
abnormal  state  the  mind  would  be  of  no  benefit  to  the  body, 
and  all  human  life  would  be  restricted  to  a  very  short  time. 
Through  the  medium  of  the  senses  we  are  brought  into  inti- 
mate communion  with  the  infinite  developments  of  matter: 


UNITY  OF  DESIGN  IN  NATURE.  103 

we  hear  the  countless  modifications  of  sounds,  we  inhale  the 
fragrance  of  flowers,  we  see  the  beauty  of  nature,  we  touch 
the  smooth  and  the  rough,  we  taste  the  sweet  and  the  hitter ; 
but  do  we  consider  that  upon  which  the  senses  are  built  ? 
Are  we  conscious  of  that  mysterious  union  of  the  senses  with 
the  mind,  by  which  so  intimate  a  sympathy  is  kept  up  be- 
tween the  external  and  the  internal,  the  material  and  the  im- 
material ?  If  unity  of  end,  the  oneness  of  one  great  plan  is 
not  here  displayed,  where  is  it  displayed?  That  substances 
so  opposite  in  their  nature,  so  essentially  diverse  in  their 
essence,  should  yet  associate  together  in  an  intimacy  so  great 
can  be  attributed  only  to  one  great  design,  revealing  one 
mind  unlimited  in  wisdom  and  goodness.  Thus  the  unity  of 
design  in  nature  involves  also  the  idea  of  the  oneness  of  the 
first  great  cause  of  nature,  and  intelligently  considered  ex- 
poses the  fallac}^  of  an  infinite  series  of  causes  and  efiects. 
Does  not  the  idea  of  eflfect  involve  the  idea  of  power  ?  Must 
not  all  power  in  action  or  effects  have  a  commencement 
somewhere  ?  If  a  person  should  dream  of  an  infinite  chain 
of  cause  and  effect,  no  dreaming  could  do  away  with  the  fact 
that  each  link  in  that  chain  involves  a  supporting  power 
somewhere.  It  is  impossible  to  get  rid  of  support  by  increas- 
ing to  infinity  the  number  of  links  in  this  supposed  chain  of 
cause  and  effect.  The  more  links  demanded  for  this  chain, 
the  greater  ultimately  must  be  the  strength  of  the  supporting 
power  that  holds  the  chain  up.  The  mind  is  driven  irre- 
sistibly to  the  conclusion  of  the  absurdity  of  an  infinite  series 
of  effects  and  causes,  because  the  unity  of  design  in  nature 
not  only  points  to  the  oneness  of  its  great  author,  but  shows, 
however  incomprehensible  God  may  be  in  himself,  that  yet 
he  must  be  the  first  great  cause,  whose  power,  infinite  in 
manifestation,  holds  up  that  chain  of  links  surpassing  in 
number  all  finite  estimation. 

Our  conclusion  is  the  same  if  we  consider  especially  those 
effects  bearing  the  clear  marks  of  adaptation  and  design. 
If  one  eflfect  of  contrivance  cannot  exist  without  a  designing 
mind,  certainly  no  number  of  eflfects,  however  augmented, 
could  exist  without  such  a  mind. 


104  UNITY  OF  DESIGN  IN  NATURE. 

"  Unity  added  to  iatinity,"  says  Pascal,  "  does  not  increase 
it  any  more  than  a  foot  measure  increases  an  infinite  space. 
What  is  finite  vanishes  before  tliat  which  is  infinite,  and 
becomes  nothing.  Thus  does  our  understanding  before  God, 
and  our  righteousness  before  his  righteousness." 

"We  may  certainly  know  there  is  a  God  without  compre- 
hending what  he  is ;  and  you  ought  by  no  means  to  conclude 
there  is  no  God,  because  you  cannot  perfectly  comprehend 
his  nature." 


CHAPTER   XIV. 

GENERAL  HAPPINESS  OF  ANIMAL  EXISTENCE,  AND  INTELLECTUAL 
AND  MORAL  ACTION  REVEALING  THE  GOODNESS  AND  MERCY 
OP    GOD. 

Life  upon  the  whole  is  a  scene  of  enjoyment.  Animal 
existence  is  one  of  pleasure  rather  than  pain.  Happiness  is 
the  rule,  while  suffering  is  the  exception.  Animal  existence 
is  generally  one  long  scene  of  liappiness,  not  indeed  uniform, 
not  unattended  with  pain,  but  the  proportion  of  suffering  is 
to  the  amount  of  enjoyment  but  very  small.  The  uneasiness 
or  fear  experienced  is  usually  only  enough  to  secure  from 
greater  evils.  One  thing  is  made  to  counteract  another.  If 
pain  is  long  continued,  it  is  small ;  if  violent,  it  is  short.  But 
freedom  from  suffering,  and  with  it  long  enjoyment,  is  the 
condition  of  most  of  our  existence.  From  the  highest  scale 
of  animal  life  to  the  lowest  we  find  that  life  has  its  pleasure. 
How  does  every  day  disclose  new  scenes  of  happiness  for 
creatures  !  How  pleasantly  glide  the  hours  away  of  sensitive 
existence !  Moments  of  rapture  may  be  few,  but  the  serene 
current  of  quiet  pleasure,  how  uniform,  how  great !  Night 
and  day  is  given  to  us, — one  for  rest,  the  other  for  action. 
Our  toils  sweeten  the  repose  of  night,  our  rest  invigorates  us 
for  the  activity  of  the  day.  When  we  look  upon  some  great 
city  as  the  sun  goes  down  in  the  skies,  and  the  moon  marches 
with  noiseless  step  over  the  heavens,  what  keeps  so  many 
thousands  in  slumber  so  sweet,  and  then  awakes  them  to  the 
joys  and  duties  of  another  day  ?  Why  so  uniform  this  suc- 
cession of  activity  and  repose  ?  Why  fly  so  swiftly  the 
mighty  hours  ?  Why  do  man  and  brute  so  unconsciously  give 
way  to  rest  ?  Is  it  not  a  peculiar  mark  of  the  divine  good- 
ness that  the  wants  of  our  nature  so  great  are  met  with  such 
uniformity  ?    As  night  brings  with  it  repose  for  the  exhausted 

(105) 


106  GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC. 

body,  and  day  returns  with  its  active  pleasures,  do  we  not 
with  every  passing  hour  see  new  proof  of  the  benevolence  of 
God  ?  Could  we  conceive  God  thus  kind  if  not  good  ?  Does 
the  mother  carefully  prepare  a  bed  for  her  infant  and  snaooth 
his  pillow,  and  hush  him  to  slumber  with  her  lullaby  song, 
unless  she  cares  for  her  child  ?  Is  her  maternal  solicitude  no 
proof  of  her  love  ?  And  when  a  care  inlinitely  greater  is 
exercised  over  us,  and  our  hours  of  weakness  are  protected 
from  a  thousand  dangers,  and  we  are  kept  from  the  destruc- 
tion that  wasteth  at  noonday,  and  the  pestilence  that  walketh 
in  darkness,  have  we  not  high  proof  that  God  is  good  ?  Re- 
member, man  is  dependent  upon  the  author  of  his  existence 
in  a  way  that  no  creature  is  dependent  upon  another.  De- 
pendence in  the  one  is  relative,  but  with  God  it  is  absolute. 
JSTot  less  constant  is  it  than  intimate  and  peculiar.  The  crea- 
ture receives  everything  and  gives  nothing.  Man  is  inlinitely 
in  debt  to  God,  while  God  owes  not  a  farthing.  An  eternity 
cannot  cancel  man's  obligations.  We  are  constantly  inclined 
to  the  error  that  possession  of  life  gives  a  right  to  life.  But 
how  is  this  shown?  Is  not  the  existence  of  one  hour  of 
happiness  a  boon  by  the  Creator?  Is  not  the  gift  of  one 
day  of  pleasure  a  greater  bequest  ?  Is  not  the  gift  of  a  week, 
a  mouth,  a  year  of  enjoyment  a  favor  greater  still?  But  if 
before  exi'stence  it  would  be  absurd  to  speak  of  a  right  to  it, 
does  its  possession  give  a  better  title  to  it  ?  When  we  speak 
of  the  kindness  of  creatures,  their  benevolence,  we  speak  of 
that  which  is  relative,  which  must  be  restricted  by  a  thou- 
sand qualifications,  which  is  dependent  in  its  exercise  by 
innumerable  contingencies ;  but  the  benevolence  of  God  is 
absolute,  it  gushes  forth  from  a  well  of  fathomless  depth, 
from  a  fountain  low  down  as  the  heart  of  God  and  vast  as 
his  own  boundless  nature.  Thus  the  value  of  the  benevo- 
lence of  God  is  immeasurably  enhanced,  from  the  fact  that  it 
is  to  his  creatures  a  mere  gratuity.  The  creature  basks 
'  under  the.  sunshine  of  the  divine  benignity,  while  every  ray 
is  free  and  undeserved.  Be  the  favors  of  God  great  or  small, 
no  creature  can  demand  them  as  a  right.  If  they  come  to 
him,  they  come  as  a  gratuity  that  God  may  give  or  withhold. 


GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC.  107 

But  the  goodness  of  God  is  also  seen  from  the  wide  diffusion 
of  happiness  anioug  creatures.  This  happiness  is  propor- 
tioned to  their  natures.  If  we  take  the  scale  of  animal  life, 
and,  commencing  with  the  bottom  we  ascend  to  the  top,  we 
find  that  existence  is  with  the  lowest  up  to  the  highest  of 
creatures  one  uniform  indication  of  the  divine  goodness. 
Who  that  observes  the  play  of  life  in  the  humblest  of  crea- 
tures that  doubts  the  enjoyment  of  existence  ?  In  the 
sportive  movements  of  the  j'oung  of  animals,  is  there  not  high 
evidence  of  pleasure  ?  When  we  see  the  eagle  soaring  far 
up  in  the  air,  or  listen  to  the  warbling  of  the  little  songster 
upon  the  bush,  have  we  no  proof  of  the  goodness  of  God  ? 
Why  so  universal  the  appearance  of  enjoyment  ?  Why  do 
we  find  that — search  through  the  varied  orders  of  animal 
existence,  investigate  every  species  offish,  or  insect,  or  bird, 
or  quadruped — their  condition  is  one  of  pleasure  rather  than 
pain?  Why  is  pain  the  rare  exception,  and  enjoj^ment  the 
rule  of  life  ?  Why,  from  the  ephemeral  life  of  the  insect  of 
an  hour  to  the  protracted  existence  of  a  century  of  time,  do 
we  see  every  page  of  being  written  all  over  with  the  language 
of  enjoyment?  Does  not  this  show  that  God  loves  the  hap- 
piness of  his  creatures,  and  seeks  to  promote  it?  Happiness 
may  be  divided  into  three  kinds:  that  which  is  physical, 
mental,  and  moral.  The  body  is  the  seat  of  the  appetites 
and  the  involuntary  action  of  the  blood,  the  nerves,  muscles, 
lungs,  and  heart.  In  our  physical  nature  lie  the  senses,  such 
as  sight,  hearing,  taste,  smell,  and  feeling.  But  the  action  of 
the  appetites,  the  involuntary  movement  of  blood,  nerves, 
muscles,  lungs,  and  heart  might  be  painful  rather  than  pleas- 
urable, and  yet  we  live  in  the  world.  A  constant  uneasiness 
might  attend  the  movement  of  the  body  and  the  gratification 
of  our  senses,  and  yet  not  so  great  as  the  love  of  life.  Our 
physical  existence  might  be  barely  endurable,  without  being 
altogether  unendurable.  We  may  have  a  constant  experience 
of  pain,  and  yet  not  so  extreme  as  to  supplant  the  fear  of 
death.  Such  a  state  of  existence  is  supposable,  why  not 
actual  ?  The  reply  is,  the  goodness  of  God.  God  loves  the 
happiness  of  his  creatures  too  well  to  make  their  life  only 


108  GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC. 

endurable.  So  far  from  our  physical  state  being  only  the 
negation  of  pain,  it  is  a  positive  source  of  enjoyment.  It  is 
a  physical  pleasure  to  gratify  suitably  the  appetites.  All 
animals  love  to  see,  and  hear,  and  taste,  and  touch,  and  smell. 
All  the  senses  are  avenues  of  pleasure;  but  more  than  this, 
the  involuntary  action  of  the  blood,  nerves,  muscles,  and 
lungs  have  in  their  wa}^  happiness;  their  disorder  is  always 
attended  with  pain,  their  healthy  action  with  comfort.  But 
why,  unless  God  loves  our  happiness,  should  for  the  most 
part  the  physical  state  of  creatures  reveal  the  involuntary 
part  of  the  body  a  condition  of  pleasant  rather  than  painful 
action  ?  Why  does  the  process  of  physical  life  show  the  har- 
monious action  of  a  thousand  springs  never,  as  a  rule,  coming 
in  collision  with  each  other?  Why  our  physical  mechanism 
so  seldom  meeting  ajar?  Could  we  dissect  our  own  bodies, 
and  look  at  those  vital  cords  that  tie  our  bones  together; 
could  we  watch  the  opening  and  shutting  of  millions  of 
valves,  the  blood  pouring  through  countless  channels,  the 
nerves  permeating  all  over  the  system  ;  could  the  laboratory 
within  be  unveiled  where  the  secret  chemistry  of  nature 
works  its  miracles  of  assimilation  ;  could  we  study  the  mys- 
tery of  animal  growth,  the  process  of  nervous  and  muscular 
action,  the  separation  of  the  oxygen  from  the  air,  the  throwing 
oft'  of  the  carbon,  and  the  intricacies  of  countless  movements, 
— should  not  our  wonder  of  the  wisdom  of  God  be  even  sur- 
passed by  the  feeling  of  his  unlimited  goodness  ?  It  is  not  the 
diversity  of  instruments  in  the  body  that  is  only  to  be  admired, 
but  the  happy  harmony  of  their  action.  It  is  not  that  they 
subserve  the  end  of  life  alone,  but  that  they  secure  so  happy  a 
lifcj — a  life,  upon  the  whole,  of  great  enjoyment ;  a  life  closed 
indeed  by  death  and  made  less  desirable  by  the  infirmities  of 
age,  but  yet  a  life  where  the  balance  of  pleasure  far  out- 
weighs the  evil  of  pain.  Is  it  conceivable  that  a  being  not 
good  would  adopt  that  course  peculiar  onlj"  to  a  benevolent 
God  ?  Would  we  not  expect  that  misery  would  preponderate 
in  our  system  with  a  God  who  rejoiced  in  evil,  and  made  evil 
the  end  of  his  action  ?  Consider,  that  if  benevolence  in  man 
shows  itself  by  seeking  the  happiness  rather  than  misery  of 


GEXERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC.  109 

society,  infinitely  more  does  all  nature  show  that  benevolence 
is  the  reigning  principle  in  the  heart  of  Grod.  In  a  twofold 
way  is  this  seen  :  first,  by  the  conscience,  whose  earliest  lesson, 
when  unperverted,  teaches  us  to  hate  wrong  and  love  the 
good;  and  then  by  the  constant  manifestation  in  the  works 
of  creation  that  happiness  is  loved  more  than  misery.  Thus, 
the  benevolence  of  God  is  seen  combining  the  two  elements 
of  justice  and  love — -justice  to  regulate  the  love,  love  to  in- 
spire the  justice;  the  one  supreme  in  the  mind  of  God,  the 
other  in  the  heart  of  God.  By  justice  the  benevolence  of 
God  is  revealed  in  its  majesty,  by  love  in  its  amiableness, — 
the  one  commands  our  esteem,  the  other  our  affection. 
Through  the  varied  ranks  of  animal  being,  happiness  has 
been  seen  to  be  the  prevailing  rule,  while  pain  is  only  the 
exception.  But  when  we  come  to  consider  our  mental  and 
moral  organization  there  is  more  clearly  seen  the  goodness 
of  God.  "Wonderful  as  may  be  the  mechanism  of  the  body, 
the  mechanism  of  mind  and  heart  is  more  so.  Two  facts  in 
respect  to  the  soul  of  man  all  admit :  the  soul  is  mental 
and  it  is  moral.  By  mental  is  meant  that  the  soul  thinks 
and  reasons;  by  moral,  that  it  feels  and  discriminates  right 
from  wrong.  But  the  condition  of  the  soul  as  mental  and 
moral  presents  a  most  important  subject  of  inquiry.  What 
is  the  uniform  rule  of  mental  and  moral  action?  What  is 
the  fruit  of  the  suitable  action  of  mind,  conscience,  and  aflPec- 
tion  ?  Does  enjoyment  or  pain  arise  from  the  proper  exer- 
cise of  the  mental  and  moral  faculties  given  to  us  by  God  ? 
Eemember,  mental  and  moral  action  is  restricted  to  a  right 
exercise.  We  take  into  consideration  alone  the  faculties  of 
the  soul,  in  their  mental  and  moral  action  harmonizing 
together.  We  speak  not  of  an  unhealth}-  action,  or  the  sepa- 
rate instruments  of  the  soul  in  collision,  but  in  harmony,  and 
confined  in  their  exercise  to  their  own  legitimate  sphere. 
We  afi&rm  that  happiness  is  the  invariable  fruit  of  right 
mental  and  moral  action :  no  pleasures  so  great  as  the 
pleasures  of  thought  and  duty  ;  no  satisfaction  so  sweet  as  the 
approbation  of  conscience,  the  glow"  of  moral  worth,  or  the 
lofty  joy  of  mental   attainment.     The   highest  happiness  is 


110  GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC. 

experienced  when  the  will  inspires  the  mind  to  noble  effort, 
or  the  heart  to  deeds  of  love.  The  pleasures  of  sense  are 
far  inferior  to  the  pleasures  of  thought,  and  of  virtue.  But 
great  as  may  be  the  pleasures  of  thought,  the  pleasures  of 
virtue  are  greater.  As  the  moral  part  of  man  is  the  no- 
blest of  his  faculties,  so  its  right  action  secures  the  deepest 
happiness.  If,  when  we  contemplate  the  pleasures  of  mind 
and  virtue,  we  find  that  their  legitimate  exercise  results  in 
happiness,  then  is  there  not  in  this  fact  a  high  argument  for 
the  goodness  of  God  ?  If  our  physical  nature  is  ao  con- 
structed as  to  afford  great  pleasure,  and  the  exercise  of  mind 
and  practice  also  of  virtue  conduces  to  our  happiness,  then 
have  we  not  a  threefold  reason,  even  that  derived  from  our 
physical,  intellectual,  and  moral  nature,  for  believing  in  the 
goodness  of  God?  Commencing  with  conscience,  it  wall  be 
seen  that  the  great  element  of  divine  goodness  is  justice;  that 
it  is  not  only  the  love  of  happiness,  but  the  love  of  right  with 
happiness  that  marks  the  character  of  God;  that  virtue  is  a 
higher  end  than  enjoyment, — but  if,  with  the  highest  end  we 
find  another  end  aimed  at  of  vast  importance ;  if  both  right 
and  happiness  are  made  to  go  together  as  far  as  possible ;  if 
we  see  that  the  exercise  of  mind  and  virtue  is  attended  with 
great  pleasure,  that  even  apart  from  external  influences,  and 
without  those  outward  rewards  that  generally  await  the  right 
efforts  of  the  mind  and  heart,  there  is  an  internal  satisfaction 
that  more  than  repays  the  toil  and  self-denial  experienced, — 
then  have  we  not  the  noblest  proof  of  the  goodness  of  God? 
God  would  be  good,  if  the  right  exercise  of  our  mental  and 
moral  faculties  were  attended  only  with  that  low  degree  of 
comfort  that  results  from  the  absence  of  pain  or  uneasiness ; 
but  when  pleasures  of  the  most  exalted  nature  ensue  from 
the  suitable  action  of  our  higher  faculties,  then  must  we  not 
believe  that  God,  in  thus  bringing  about  the  happiness  of 
man,  does  indeed  show  that  next  to  right  he  supremely  loves 
the  enjoyment  of  his  creatures  ?  When  we  consider  the 
pleasures  of  thought,  we  find  that  they  correspond  to  each 
development  of  thought.  They  are  not  the  same  with  one 
kind  of  mental  exercise  as  with  another.     The  rapture  of 


GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC.  m 

the  orator  or  poet  in  tlieir  movements  of  highest  triumph  is 
peculiar  to  that  kind  of  mental  eftbrt ;  but  the  man  of  science 
or  the  naturalist,  who  studies  the  structure  of  vegetables,  or 
makes  himself  familiar  with  the  history  of  the  fishy  tribes,  the 
insect  race,  the  bird  or  the  quadruped ;  the  anatomist,  who 
pries  into  the  secrets  of  the  physical  structure;  or  the  artist, 
who  pictures  forth  in  marble  or  upon  canvas  his  ideal  of  beauty 
— all  these  have  their  own  peculiar  pleasures;  pleasures  that 
correspond  to  each  sphere  of  mental  labor.  Not  more  diver- 
sified are  the  kinds  of  thought,  than  the  enjoyments  that  spring 
from  them.  Every  labor  of  mind  brings  with  it  its  own  re- 
ward. From  the  calm  and  tranquil  pleasures  that,  like  gentle 
streams  pursue  their  noiseless  course,  to  those  more  noble 
enjoyments  that  swell  forth  into  mighty  rivers,  there  is  seen  in 
the  exercise  of  mind  every  degree  and  variety  of  enjoyment. 
The  orator  or  poet  may  prefer  his  kind  of  happiness;  but  the 
man  of  science,  the  historian,  or  the  artist  will  not  exchange 
their  pleasures  for  the  former.  Thus,  not  only  is  there  the 
greatest  diversity  of  mental  gifts,  but  as  wide  a  diversity  of 
intellectual  joys.  But  what  language  can  do  justice  to  the 
pleasures  of  virtue?  Virtue,  like  thought,  has  its  high  and 
low  sphere ;  like  thought  it  has  its  endless  diversity  of  exer- 
cise ;  its  throne  is  in  the  conscience.  Conscience  is  not  virtue, 
but  conscience  tells  what  virtue  is.  Conscience  shows  its  in- 
herent right  and  worth ;  virtue  is  the  action  of  a  pure 
disposition  and  noble  spirit ;  conscience  the  herald  that 
proclaims  its  presence  ;  virtue  is  the  homage  of  the  heart 
to  God ;  conscience  the  faculty  which  esteems  that  homage  ; 
virtue  is  the  love  of  goodness ;  conscience  the  approver  of  it. 
Virtue  is  obedience  to  law ;  conscience  that  which  judges  the 
equity  of  law ;  virtue  is  the  heart's  movement  towards 
that  which  is  morally  beautiful ;  conscience  the  witness  of 
that  beauty ;  virtue  is  the  reflection  of  the  image  of  God ; 
conscience  the  canvas  upon  which  that  image  is  portrayed. 
Thus,  we  see  that  the  pleasures  of  virtue,  springing  directly 
from  our  moral  nature,  lead  us  at  once  to  the  recognition  of 
the  goodness  of  God.  How  good  must  be  that  being  who  thus 
makes  the  path  of  virtue  so  pleasant !     How  must  God  love 


112  GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC. 

moral  excellence  when  he  strews  along  the  way  of  life  roses 
of  immortal  beauty  !  Is  it  not  a  high  evidence  of  the  love  of 
God  to  lis,  that  duty  is  made  our  highest  happiness  ?  Is 
there  not  in  the  heart  itself  a  fountain  of  joy  that  needs 
but  the  call  of  duty  to  make  it  send  forth  its  living  waters? 
If  the  exercise  of  mind  is  noble,  is  not  that  of  virtue  far  more 
so?  Consider  the  variety  of  pleasures  that  spring  from  the 
pursuit  of  virtue.  The}-  accord  with  the  peculiar  virtue  ex- 
ercised. Is  the  virtue  of  patience  called  for  ?  there  is  an 
internal  composure  whose  satisfaction  can  be  experienced, 
but  not  described.  Is  the  virtue  of  courage  practiced?  it 
brings  with  it  a  feeling  of  great  pleasure.  Is  compassion  to 
the  suftering,  or  the  relief  of  the  fatherless  and  poor  exer- 
cised ?  then  the  purest  joj's  are  awakened  in  the  soul. 
Whatever  may  be  the  class  of  virtues,  each  class  has  its  own 
reward.  Not  only  do  we  see  the  greatest  diversity  in  the 
pleasures  of  virtue,  but  we  see  those  pleasures  spontaneous 
and  unforced.  The  will  cannot  create  them  where  there  is 
no  virtue ;  and  the  will  cannot  suppress  them  when  they  rise 
up  in  the  heart.  Man  may  counterfeit  virtue,  but  he  cannot 
the  joy  of  virtue.  Do  men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of 
thistles  ?  Even  thus  is  it  with  virtue.  Its  sweet  fruit  can 
never  grow  from  the  thorns  and  thistles  of  sin.  But  the 
goodness  of  God  is  also  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  most  im- 
perfect virtue  is  made  to  give  some  pleasure.  Not  great 
virtues  alone,  but  all  virtues  have  their  joys, — joys  not  de- 
pendent upon  outward  circumstances,  not  like  wealth  or 
honor,  uncertain  and  soon  passing  away,  but  pleasures  that  are 
permanent  as  virtue  itself.  The  outward  world  may  vanish 
away,  but  the  soul  carries  about  with  it  a  world  of  its  own. 
But  the  highest  evidence  of  the  goodness  of  God  is  seen  from 
a  consideration  of  our  state,  sinful  by  nature.  Goodness 
from  God  to  moral  agents  who  have  abused  their  freedom  bj' 
sin,  who  have  fallen  from  perfect  rectitude,  is  more  than 
goodness :  it  is  goodness  bearing  the  impress  of  mercy, — 
goodness  revealing  itself  by  countless  favors  to  the  undeserv- 
ing and  to  the  unthankful.  Thus,  all  God's  bounty  to  us  is 
the   bounty  of  his  mercy;  the  pleasures  he  grants  are  the 


GENERAL  HAPPINESS,  ETC.  113 

fruits  of  his  forbearance  and  compassion.  The  goodness  of 
God  to  lis  is  the  goodness  of  mercy,  infinite  as  his  own  heart 
of  love,  and  boundless  as  the  wants  of  his  erring  children, — 
mercy,  deep-flowing  as  a  sea  over  a  world  of  sin,  tender  as 
a  mother's  love  for  her  infant,  free  as  the  air  and  divinely 
rich. 

"  For  so  the  light  of  the  world  in  the  morning  of  the  crea- 
tion," says  Jeremy  Taylor,  "  was  spread  abroad  like  a  cur- 
tain, and  dwelt  nowhere,  but  filled  the  'expansum'  with  a 
dissemination  great  as  the  unfoldings  of  the  air's  loose  gar- 
ment, or  the  wilder  fringes  of  the  fire,  without  knots,  or  order, 
or  combination, — but  God  gathered  the  beams  in  his  hands, 
and  united  them  into  a  globe  of  fire,  and  all  the  light  of  the 
world  became  the  body  of  the  sun ;  and  he  lent  some  to  his 
weaker  sister  that  walks  in  the  night  and  guides  a  traveler, 
and  teaches  him  to  distinguish  a  house  from  a  river,  or  a 
rock  from  a  plain  field,  so  is  the  mercy  of  God,  and  it  filled 
all  that  infinite  distance  and  space  that  hath  no  measures 
but  the  will  of  God,  until  God,  designing  to  communicate 
that  excellency,  and  make  it  relative,  created  angels,  that 
he  might  have  persons  capable  of  huge  gifts,  and  men  who 
he  knew  would  need  forgiveness,  for  so  the  angels,  our  elder 
brothers,  dwelt  forever  in  the  house  of  their  Father,  and 
never  broke  his  commandments;  but  we  the  younger,  like 
prodigals,  forsook  our  Father's  house,  and  went  into  a  strange 
country,  and  followed  stranger  courses,  and  spent  the  portion 
of  our  nature,  and  forfeited  all  our  title  to  the  family,  and 
came  to  need  another  portion.  For,  ever  since  the  fall  of 
Adam, — who,  like  an  unfortunate  man,  spent  all  that  a 
wretched  man  could  need,  or  a  happy  man  could  have, — our 
life  is  repentance,  and  forgiveness  is  all  our  portion  ;  and, 
though  angels  were  objects  of  God's  bounty,  yet  man  only  is 
in  proper  speaking,  the  object  of  his  mercy;  and  the  mercy 
which  dwelt  in  an  infinite  circle  became  confined  to  a  little 
ring,  and  dwelt  here  below  till  it  hath  carried  all  God's  por- 
tion up  to  heaven,  where  it  shall  reign  in  glory  upon  our 
crowned  heads  forever  and  forever.  But,  for  him  that  con- 
siders God's  mercies,  and  dwells  awhile  in  that  depth,  it  is 


114  GEXERAL  HAPPIXESS.  ETC. 

hard  not  to  talk  widely  and  vrithout  art,  and  order  of  dis- 
coursings.  St.  Peter  talked,  lie  knew  not  what,  when  he 
entered  into  a  cloud  with  Jesus  upon  Mount  Tabor,  though 
it  passed  over  him  like  the  little  curtains  that  ride  upon  the 
north  wind  and  pass  between  the  sun  and  us ;  and,  when  we 
converse  with  a  light  greater  than  the  sun,  and  taste  a  sweet- 
ness more  delicious  than  the  dew  of  heaven,  and  in  our 
thoughts  entertain  the  ravishments  and  harmony  of  that 
atonement  which  reconciles  God  to  man,  and  man  to  felicity, 
it  will  be  the  more  easily  pardoned  if  we  should  be  like  per- 
sons that  admire  much  and  say  but  little :  and  indeed  we 
can  but  confess  the  glories  of  the  Lord  by  dazzled  eyes,  and 
a  stammering  tongue,  and  a  heart  overcharged  with  the 
miracles  of  this  infinitv." 


CHAPTER   XV. 

THE    ^ESTHETIC    NATURE    OF    MAN. 

The  nature  of  man  is  not  only  intellectual  and  moral,  it  is 
also  {esthetic.  There  is  a  principle  of  taste,  of  perception  of 
the  sublime  and  beautiful,  even  as'  of  atfeetion,  thought,  or 
moral  discrimination.  But  in  analyzing  the  principle  of  the 
beautiful  and  the  sublime  in  our  nature,  or  the  faculty  of 
taste,  a  great  difficulty  presents  itself  in  the  impossibility  of 
definition,  or  giving  logical  forms  to  our  perceptions.  The 
fact  is,  the  principle  of  taste  in  the  mind  by  which  so  great  a 
pleasure  is  secured  from  the  perception  of  beauty  or  sub- 
limity, is  most  intimately  associated  with  the  affections.  The 
class  of  emotions  that  rise  up  in  the  mind  when  some  object  of 
great  beauty  or  sublimity  is  presented,  is  so  difi'erent  from 
the  intellectual  apprehension  of  usefulness,  that  we  at  once 
decide  in  our  minds  that  utility  and  beauty  can  never  be 
confounded  together.  But  what  are  the  elements  that  enter 
into  our  idea  of  the  beautiful  and  the  sublime  ?  In  general 
language,  for  only  general  language  can  be  appropriate  to  the 
description  of  a  fjiculty  whose  exercise  is  so  subtle  as  to  elude 
the  power  of  delineation  in  numberless  instances,  we  say  that 
order,  harmony,  proportion,  fitness,  are  included  in  our  per- 
ceptions of  that  beautiful  or  sublime ;  but  the  beautiful 
clearly  difit'ers  from  the  sublime  :  greatness  seems  to  belong  to 
the  sublime,  while  smallness  is  necessary  to  our  idea  of 
beauty.  Thus,  the  language  the  ocean  is  sublime,  but  the 
rivulet  gently  winding  its  way  through  a  meadow  is  beauti- 
ful. But  the  idea  of  the  rugged  or  the  precipitous  also 
enters  into  our  conception  of  the  sublime,  while  the  smooth 
and  the  gradual  is  with  us  essential  to  the  perception  of  the 
beautiful.  Thus,  the  deep  ravine,  the  rushing  of  water  over 
great  rapids,  the  rugged  sides  of  a  high  mountain,  give  to  us 

(115) 


116  THE  ESTHETIC  NATURE   OF  MAN. 

the  emotion  of  the  sublime ;  but  a  smooth  lawn,  a  delicate 
flower,  a  small  hill  clothed  in  verdure,  we  call  beautiful. 
Fitness  and  proportion  enter  peculiarlj'  into  our  conception 
of  that  beautiful.  Thus,  we  always  believe  the  beauty  of  a 
body  sensibly  diminished,  if  a  foot  or  hand  or  any  member 
of  it  is  missing.  A  house  with  everything  in  proportion  we 
call  beautiful,  but  variety  and  the  unique  is  necessarj'  to 
the  idea  of  the  sublime.  JSTow  nature,  by  presenting  the 
greatest  variety  of  objects,  beautiful  and  sublime,  directly  re- 
veals itself  to  the  sesthetic  part  of  our  constitution.  The 
taste  of  man  has  a  boundless  tield  for  exercise  in  nature.  In 
these  the  development  of  the  aesthetic  part  of  our  nature,  and 
the  afibrding  to  it  so  vast  a  variety  of  objects  for  its  exercise, 
in  making  the  world  without  us  so  adapted  to  the  world 
of  taste  within  us,  there  is  high  proof  of  the  goodness  and 
wisdom  of  God.  The  world  is  full  of  the  beautiful  and  the 
sublime.  Wherever  man  goes  he  finds  the  principle  of  taste 
within  him  directly  appealed  to.  How  powerful  is  the  influ- 
ence of  this  principle  in  our  nature,  may  be-  seen  from  the 
fact  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  our  enjoyments  arise  from 
its  exercise.  Thus,  the  perception  of  some  object  of  sub- 
limity or  beauty  awakens  at  once  pleasure  in  the  mind; 
the  contemplation  of  the  deformed  or  the  ugly  awakens  in 
us  feelings  of  pain.  Observe  how  early  the  principle  of 
taste  reveals  itself!  The  child  will  be  frightened  by  a 
homely  face  long  before  he  manifests  the  marks  of  reason. 
Although  the  faculty  of  taste  develops  itself  by  exercise,  and 
becomes  in  proportion  to  its  cultivation  more  refined,  yet  it 
never  in  man,  however  degraded,  appears  to  be  altogether 
lost.  There  is  that  in  our  nature  that  loves  at  all  times  the 
beautiful  and  the  sublime.  We  at  all  times  feel  what  it  is  to 
look  upon  some  vast  mountain  scenery,  the  ocean  lashed  by 
the  angry  wind  into  a  tempest,  and  the  quiet  meadow-land, — 
the  smooth  flowing  of  a  stream,  or  the  flower  opening  its 
leaves  to  the  sun.  Thus,  we  can  never  lose  in  our  minds  the 
deep  impressions  of  the  beautiful  and  the  sublime  of  nature. 
We  ever  associate  that  which  we  know  to  be  essentially 
diflerent,  with  our  ideas  of  that  which  constitutes  beauty  or 


THE  ESTHETIC  NATURE   OF  MAN.  117 

sublimity.  Thus,  we  pass  ffoni  natural  objects  to  moral  ob- 
jects with  rapid  transition  of  mind, — we  say  virtues  are  beau- 
tiful or  sublime  ;  a  daughter's  attention  to  her  aged  mother 
is  beautiful ;  a  father's  care  for  his  child  is  beautiful ;  a  deed 
of  lofty  heroism  or  of  mauly  courage  is  sublime ;  virtue  we 
paint  always  as  beautiful ;  great  self-sacriiices  for  the  good  of 
others,  we  consider  sublime.  We  never  borrow  from  nature 
our  idea  of  the  deformed  or  ugly,  and  attach  it  to  virtue. 
But  vice  we  uniformly  paint  as  ugly;  the  features  of  crime 
we  represent  as  hideous.  Why  do  we  find  the  external 
world  so  exactly  adapted  to  the  esthetic  part  of  our  nature  ? 
Why  a  correspondence  so  fitting  to  our  constitution?  If 
God  was  not  good,  should  we  see  so  man}'  evidences  to 
awaken  in  us  pleasure  from  the  sublime  and  beautiful  of 
nature?  Action  in  the  inorganic  or  organic  kingdom,  and 
especially  ^^TtYi^  action,  has  in  it  peculiarly  the  sublime.  Thus, 
the  tempest  in  its  energy,  the  lightning  flash,  the  earthquake, 
all  comprehend  the  sublime.  The  aesthetic  part  of  our 
nature  not  only  shows  itself  in  the  emotions  of  hope,  joy, 
reverence,  but  also  calls  forth,  at  times,  in  the  sublime  the 
emotion  of  fear.  Unknown  power  has  always  in  itself  more 
or  less  of  fear;  so  also  the  dark  and  the  obscure.  But  the 
beautiful  combines  more  the  element  of  the  delicate  and  the 
feeble.  Thus,  fragility  enters  more  into  our  conception  of 
beauty,  while  strength  into  our  perception  of  the  sublime. 
We  speak  not  of  a  flower  as  sublime,  but  beautiful.  But  the 
lion  or  war-horse  we  call  sublime  when  putting  forth  their 
energies.  Consider,  also,  the  emotions  of  sublimity  or 
beauty  as  awakened  by  music.  Sublime  music  is  very  dif- 
ferent from  beautiful  music.  Each  kind  of  music  borrows 
in  sound  the  elements  that  enter  into  the  appearance  of  ex- 
ternal objects.  Thus,  beautiful  music  has  a  soothing  influ- 
ence, but  sublime  music  awakens  us,  and  calls  forth  the 
strength  of  our  feelings.  The  beautiful  is  smooth  and  gentle, 
the  sublime  impetuous  and  rugged.  The  one  is  like  the 
gradual  slope  of  some  green  hill,  the  other  the  steep  declivity 
of  a  mountain.  The  sublime  and  the  beautiful  enter  deeply 
into  nature, — nature    in    form,  in    sound,   in    color.     How 


118  THE  ESTHETIC  NATURE   OF  MAN. 

combiued,  yet  complicated,  are  the  avenues  of  pleasure  that 
present  themselves  to  the  principle  of  taste  !  What  a  diver- 
sity of  enjoyment  is  opened  up  to  man  !  But  there  is  some- 
thin  o-  worthy  of  careful  attention,  as  connected  with  the 
sublime  and  the  beautiful :  it  is  the  sympathy  that  exists  be- 
tween the  [esthetic  part  of  our  nature  and  the  moral  part  of 
our  nature.  The  one  seems  to  love  the  company  of  the 
other.  Other  things  being  equal,  a  virtuous  man  has  more 
pleasure,  from  the  sublime  and  the  beautiful,  than  a  vicious 
man.  Vice  always  appears  to  contract  the  sensibilities  to 
that  beautiful  or  sublime.  Vice,  while  it  hardens  the  affec- 
tions, seems  to  throw  a  veil  over  the  beauties  of  nature.  As 
virtue  makes  more  refined  the  moral  feelings,  so  it  peculiarly 
fits  them  for  sympathy  with  the  sesthetic  part  of  our  nature. 
But  vice,  by  making  gross  and  blunt  the  moral  perceptions, 
incapacitates  at  the  same  time  the  taste  for  the  appreciation 
of  the  beautiful  and  the  sublime.  As  delineating  the  sym- 
pathy of  the  aesthetic  with  the  moral  nature  of  m^n,  how 
appropriately  has  Milton  represented  the  happy  pair  in  Para- 
dise uniting  together  in  their  hymn  of  praise  to  God  ! 

"  These  are  thy  glorious  works,  Parent  of  good, 
Almigjity  !  thine  this  universal  frame, 
Thus  wondrous  fair  ;  thyself  how  wondrous  then, 
Unspeakable  !  who  sitt'st  above  these  heavens, 
To  us  invisible,  or  dimly  seen 
In  these  thy  lowest  works  ;  yet  these  declare 
Thy  goodness  beyond  thought,  and  power  divine. 
Speak,  ye  who  best  can  tell,  ye  sons  of  light. 
Angels ;  for  ye  behold  him,  and  with  songs 
And  choral  symphonies,  day  without  night, 
Circle  his  throne  rejoicing ;  ye  in  heaven, 
On  earth  join  all  ye  creatures,  to  extoll 
Him  first,  him  last,  him  midst,  and  without  end. 
Fairest  of  stars,  lost  in  the  train  of  night, 
If  better  thou  belong  not  to  the  dawn, 
Sure  pledge  of  day  that  crown 'st  the  smiling  morn 
With  thy  bright  circlet,  praise  him  in  thy  sphere, 
While  day  arises,  that  sweet  hour  of  prime. 
Thou  sun,  of  this  great  world  both  eye  and  soul, 
Acknowledge  him  thy  greater,  sound  his  praise 
In  thy  eternal  course,  both  when  thou  climb'st, 


THE  MSTHETIC  NATURE   OF  MAN.  119 

And  when  high  noon  hast  gained,  and  when  thou  fall'st. 

Moon,  that  now  meet'st  the  orient  sun,  now  fli'st. 

With  the  fixed  stars,  fixed  in  their  orb  that  flies ; 

And  ye  five  other  wandering  fires  that  move 

In  mystic  dance  not  without  song,  resound 

His  praise,  who  out  of  darkness  called  up  light."' 

The  charms  of  poetry  all  arise  from  a  happy  exhibition  of 
the  beautiful  and  the  sublime ;  but  the  inspiration  of  the 
poet,  the  fire  of  genius  that  kindles  in  the  eye  of  the  painter 
or  the  sculptor,  owe  their  exclusive  origin  to  refinement  of 
taste  embodied  in  the  execution.  Nor  is  this  diflerent  with 
the  masters  of  music:  music  is  the  sublime  and  the  beautiful 
embodied  in  sound.  Observe,  then,  how  diversified  are  the 
sources  of  happiness  that  arise  from  the  development  of  the 
principle  of  taste  I  The  inspiration  of  poetry,  painting, 
sculpture,  and  music,  all  reveal  the  goodness  of  that  being 
who  has  constituted  us  with  a  nature  susceptible  of  so  much 
pleasure  from  the  exercise  of  the  principles  of  taste.  In  these, 
the  mysterious  sympathy  shown  between  the  moral  and 
aesthetic  parts  of  our  nature,  have  we  not  a  peculiar  illustra- 
tion of  the  divine  goodness  ?  Would  virtue  appear  to  us  so 
beautiful  and  sublime,  and  vice  when  seen  so  deformed  and 
hateful,  if  God  did  not  love  the  one  and  hate  the  other  ? 
Would  nature  thus  be  presented  to  the  esthetic  part  of  man, 
did  not  its  great  author  embody  in  himself  the  highest 
beauty  and  sublimity  ? 


CHAPTER   XVI. 


THE    IMAGINATION. 


One  of  the  noblest  faculties  of  man  is  the  imagination ; 
but  the  imagination,  by  forming  ideal  pictures  of  the  lovely 
and  the  grand,  brings  into  constant  exercise  the  principle 
of  taste  ;  it  creates  over  and  over  again  in  the  mind  those 
images  of  beauty  and  sublimity  which  so  powerfully  influ- 
ence the  heart.  Thus,  its  agency  is  seen  in  imparting  to  the 
aesthetic  part  of  our  nature  both  refinement  and  strength, 
delicacy  and  power,  so  that  the  mind  has  a  far  more  vivid 
sense  of  the  objects  of  nature.  Thus,  we  find  a  highly  cul- 
tivated taste  more  or  less  associated  with  the  imagination. 
Why  is  the  imagination  given  to  us  unless  it  be  to  add  vastly 
to  our  happiness,  as  well  as  to  promote  virtue  in  man  ? 
Observe  the  external  world  as  adapted  to  the  exercise  of  the 
imagination.  That  which  strikes  us  as  most  wonderful  in 
nature  is  the  exquisite  fitness  of  the  outward  and  visible, 
through  the  medium  of  the  senses,  to  the  internal  and  spir- 
itual. All  nature  would  be  a  source  of  the  highest  wretch- 
edness was  not  this  peculiar  fitness  of  things  observed.  It  is 
not  only  the  adjustment  of  one  faculty  of  the  mind  to  an- 
other ;  not  only  the  nice  balancing  of  natural  laws  so  that 
the  noblest  order  is  made  known;  but  there  is  revealed  the 
harmony  of  the  world  without  us  to  the  world  within  us, 
— a  harmony  that  brings  into  exercise  every  faculty  of  the 
mind.  Now  the  imagination  finds  in  the  external  world  an 
unlimited  field  for  development.  It  can  retire  within  its 
own  castle,  and  bring  before  the  mental  vision  those  scenes 
of  beauty  and  of  grandeur  that  so  delight  the  senses.  It  can 
recall  the  melody  of  music,  whose  sound  long  has  passed 
from  the  ear,  and  create  within  itself  new  strains  of  vocal 
(120) 


THE  IMAGINATION.  121 

harmony.  It  can  call  up  the  features  of  a  departed  friend, 
and  throw  over  them  a  more  enchanting  loveliness  than  ever 
v^as  presented  to  the  eye.  It  can  upon  the  canvas  of  the 
mind  paint  the  masterpiece  of  the  studio  with  richer  colors 
than  ever  beamed  upon  the  artist  from  the  wall.  It  can 
give  in  thought  a  nobler  beauty  than  ever  glowed  in  the 
creations  of  the  chiseled  marble.  Thus  the  imagination  has 
in  it  a  mysterious  power  of  giving  a  vitality  to  the  beautiful 
and  the  sublime  of  nature.  Its  loftiest  exercise  brings  us 
into  the  deepest  harmony  with  everything  lovely  and  grand 
without  us.  It  throws  new  charms  over  the  dull  routine  of 
life,  kindles  high  hope  in  the  heart,  and  gives  energy  in  all 
the  pursuits  of  life.  Does  not  the  provision  of  such  a  faculty 
reveal  the  wisdom  of  an  Infinite  Being  ?  Would  we  wish  to 
be  deprived  of  it?  Then  childhood  would  lose  its  highest 
glow  of  beauty, — then  youth  would,  like  a  scorched  flower, 
droop  in  its  aspirations  of  hope, — then  manhood  would  falter 
in  its  arduous  toil, — the  energies  of  life  would  be  sapped  of 
more  than  half  their  strength.  But  it  is  not  the  external 
world  only  that  presents  a  sphere  for  the  imagination.  It  can, 
from  the  dusty  leaves  of  history,  from  the  traditions  of  past 
ages,  from  associations  of  the  most  diverse  nature,  create  im- 
ages of  beauty  and  sublimity.  How  impressive  the  language 
of  Gray  in  his  "  Elegy  written  in  a  Country  Church-yard  !" 

'  Can  storied  urn  or  animated  bust 

Back  to  its  mansion  call  the  fleeting  breath? 
Can  Honor's  voice  provoke  the  silent  dust, 

Or  Flattery  soothe  the  dull,  cold  ear  of  death? 
Perhaps  in  this  neglected  spot  is  laid 

Some  heart  once  pregnant  with  celestial  fire  ; 
Hands  that  the  rod  of  empire  might  have  swayed, 

Or  waked  to  ecstasy  the  living  lyre. 
But  knowledge  to  their  eyes  her  humble  page, 

Kich  with  the  spoils  of  time,  did  ne'er  unroll ; 
Chill  Penury  repressed  their  noble  rage. 

And  froze  the  genial  current  of'the  soul. 
Full  many  a  gem  of  purest  ray  serene 

The  dark  unfathomed  caves  of  ocean  bear; 
Full  many  a  flower  is  born  to  blush  unseen. 

And  waste  its  sweetness  on  the  desert  air." 


122  THE  IMAGINATION. 

The  imagination  is  remarkable  for  its  early  development 
in  tlie  mind  of  genius.  There  seems  to  be  in  it  something 
more  purely  etherial,  more  allied  to  the  highest  refinement 
of  spirit  than  in  the  exercise  of  all  the  other  faculties  of  the 
mind.  Notice,  in  respect  to  the  imagination,  one  marked 
peculiarity.  Its  earliest  and  purest  development  is  often  in 
the  form  of  devotion  to  the  supreme  being.  God,  in  his 
power,  wisdom,  and  goodness,  is  a  theme  most  congenial 
to  its  exercise.  The  imagination  loves  the  boundless,  the 
infinite.  It  readily  ascends  from  nature  to  nature's  God.  It 
finds  its  noblest  field  for  imagery  in  the  unlimited  and  in- 
comprehensible. Thus,  as  the  painter  throws  upon  the 
canvas  a  shade  of  darkness  to  augment  the  beauty  of  his  con- 
ceptions, so  the  veil  of  mystery  thrown  over  the  Deity  gives 
a  far  higher  flight  to  the  wings  of  fancy.  Great  as  may  be 
the  mystery  of  nature,  the  mystery  of  God  is  immeasurably 
greater.  Thus  the  imagination  finds  in  its  contemplation  of 
God,  a  theme  boundless  in  its  range  as  the  universe.  The 
universe  itself,  with  God  recognized,  seems  to  be  the  reflec- 
tion of  his  character, — a  mirror  portraying  his  own  image. 
Thus,  the  genius  of  Hebrew  poetry  is  pervaded  with  the  de- 
lineations of  God.  Thus,  some  of  the  earliest  illustrations 
of  poetic  art  have  as  their  exclusive  theme  God.  Thus,  often 
the  childhood  of  genius  breaks  forth  in  a  hymn  of  praise  to 
the  Deity.  Observe  the  language  of  the  friendless  boy,  Chat 
terton,  but  eleven  years  old,  who  so  early  met  with  a  melan- 
choly grave. 

"  Almighty  framer  of  the  skies, 
O  let  our  pure  devotion  rise 

Like  incense  in  thy  sight ! 
Wrapt  in  unpenetrable  shade, 
The  texture  of  our  souls  was  made 

Till  thy  command  gave  light." 

Thus,  we  see  that  imagination  enters  not  only  early,  but 
universally  into  all  the  creations  of  genius.  What  is  our 
idea  of  the  highest  development  of  mind  and  the  noblest 
efforts  of  thought,  if  it  be  not  the  actual  realization,  the  em- 
bodiment in  statuary,  painting,  or  words  of  the  ideal  concep- 


THE  IMAGINATION.  123 

tious  of  beauty  and  sublimity,  as  made  known  in  the  imagi- 
nation ?  Here  is  the  sphere  of  genius:  its  last  effort  is  to  give 
permanence  and  living  reality  to  others  of  the  lovely  and  the 
grand,  as  first  conceived  of  in  the  mind.  But  why  does  the 
imagination,  in  its  exercise,  secure  so  great  pleasure?  Why 
does  it  create  in  the  mind  a  living  fountain  of  enjoyment,  or 
find  a  field  so  vast  for  its  range,  subjects  so  fitted  for  its  cul- 
tivation, unless  God  is  good,  and  desires  to  be  worshiped  in 
a  manner  suitable  to  his  character  and  perfections?  The 
genius  of  Hebrew  poetry  is  pervaded  with  the  highest 
elements  of  imaginative  power.  David,  Isaiah,  and  Ezekiel 
seem  to  have  exhausted  the  storehouse  of  human  thought  in 
delineating  the  majestic,  the  awful,  the  sublime,  the  wonder- 
ful in  God.  Their  minds,  rising  to  the  high  themes  of  God's 
nature  and  manifestations,  convey  thoughts  so  peculiar  that 
language  itself  staggers  in  utterance.  Thus,  poetic  descrip- 
tions of  nature  and  of  God  seem  to  differ,  in  that,  while  the 
former  is  more  sensible  and  easy  of  delineation,  the  latter  is 
vastly  more  profound,  and  enters  more  intimately  into  the 
deeps  of  the  soul.  The  imagination  revels  in  the  beautiful 
and  the  sublime  of  nature,  but  it  is  overwhelmed  in  the  con- 
sciousnpss  of  its  littleness  in  the  conception  of  God.  The 
idea  of  nature  comes  with  its  own  limitations  into  the  soul, 
but  the  idea  of  God,  the  more  clear  in  its  vision  the  more  it 
enlarges,  yet  humbles  the  spirit  of  man.  Nature  has  its 
bounds  to  the  imagination,  even  in  its  boundless  variety, — 
but  God  is  an  ocean,  not  more  fathomless  in  its  deeps  than 
inconceivably  grand  with  that  expansum  where  the  horizon 
forever  rises  and  sits  upon  its  everlasting  waters.  Thus,  we 
see  why  God  would  never  permit  an  image  of  himself  to  be 
made  even  to  please  the  objective  mind  of  the  Hebrew.  The 
imagination  was  permitted  to  portray  all  the  glories  of  na- 
ture, every  semblance  of  imagery,  and  all  moral  duties;  and 
the  great  facts  of  prophecy  were  shadowed  forth  by  rites 
and  ceremonial  pictures,  surpassing  in  gorgeousness  of  de- 
lineation the  highest  eftbrts  of  the  heathen  world.  But  the 
imagination  that  dared  to  make  an  image  of  God,  or  picture 
forth  by  any  material  emblem  the  awful  mystery  of  his  per- 


124  THE  IMAGINATION. 

sonality,  was  accursed.  Sinai  encircled  itself  in  a  chain  of 
fire,  warning  every  Israelite  not  to  pass  beyond  the  line  that 
separates  the  finite  from  the  infinite.  Study  the  genius  of 
Hebrew  poetry,  and  the  mind  will  be  impressed  with  tlie 
submissiveness,  the  docility,  the  reverential  homage  of  the 
imagination  when  contemplating  God.  It  is  altogether  des- 
titute of  that  sensual  limitation,  that  vicious  alliance  of  the 
divine  and  the  human  that  characterizes  the  theology  of 
paganism.  Thus,  while  the  poets  of  heathenism  invariably 
debase  the  idea  of  God,  and  its  philosophers  refine  him  away, 
the  result  is  that  one  class  merges  into  idolatry,  and  the  other 
passes  into  atheism.  The  pagan  imagination,  with  a  two- 
edged  sword,  destroyed  either  divine  personality  or  existence; 
but  Hebrew  fancy,  controlled  by  inspiration,  embodied  the 
element  of  the  human  in  God  enough  only  to  enlist  the  affec- 
tions, and  the  divine  to  sober  the  mind,  so  that  the  imagina- 
tion escaped  alike  the  evil  of  atheism  and  idolatry.  In 
speaking  of  the  noble  end  for  which  the  imagination  was 
made,  it  is  fitting  to  allude  to  its  fearful  perversion,  and  that 
debasement  which  makes  it  often  a  source  of  the  greatest  evil 
^o  man.  The  curse  of  most  works  upon  poetry,  fiction,  and 
philosophy  is  just  a  heathenish  imagination.  The  fancy 
made  to  observe  the  restraints  of  reason  and  virtue  often 
rushes  wild  over  hill  and  dale  like  the  horse  of  Mazeppa, 
with  the  body  of  his  master  tied  to  it.  Is  it  not  most  mourn- 
ful to  see  often  such  a  defilement  of  a  fiiculty  that  would, 
undepraved,  subserve  the  highest  pleasure  and  usefulness  to 
man !  When  we  see  swine  wallowing  in  the  mire,  our  dis- 
gust is  relieved  by  the  thought  that  swine  were  made  for  the 
dirt,  otherwise  they  would  not  have  bristles  ;  but  how  difiier- 
ent  our  feelings  in  beholding  the  songster  that  warbles  upon 
the  bush,  or  man  made  in  the  image  of  God,  lying  down  in 
the  filth !  So  of  the  imagination  degraded  in  its  office,  the 
spectacle  is  more  than  disagreeable:  it  is  revolting  and  un- 
natural. We  are  pained  to  think  that  what  can  soar  so  high, 
and  hold  converse  with  the  angels,  will  make  its  bed  where 
only  the  lowest  of  the  brute  creation  should  find  a  congenial 
home. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

CONSIDERATION   OF   ANGER  AND   SHAME,  THE  LOVE   OF  AMITY,  OF 
SOCIETY,  AND    THE    POSSESSION    OF    PROPERTY. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  passion  of  anger  may  be 
divided  into  the  instinctive  and  the  deliberate.  The  one  may 
be  right  in  its  exercise,  while  the  other  may  be  wrong.  Thus, 
we  find  that  the  natural  influence  of  anger  is  to  remove  fear 
from  its  possessor.  It  is  seen  through  the  whole  animal  crea- 
tion. It  rises  up  in  the  nature  when  injury  is  experienced 
or  threatened.  Thus,  we  see  the  weak  when  attacked  by  the 
more  strong  exhibit  instinctivel}'  anger.  How  the  eye  of  the 
boy  flashes  forth  the  emotion  of  anger  when  willfully  struck 
by  a  large  one!  Injury  awakens  this  feeling  in  the  mind. 
Thus,  not  only  do  we  experience  this  feeling  when  we  suffer 
an  unprovoked  injury,  but  we  feel  resentment  whenever  we 
read  or  hear  of  atrocious  injury  in  others.  The  principle  of 
resentment  at  hurt  or  wrong  done,  is  universally  implanted 
in  the  mind  of  man.  Thus,  anger  stands  always  a  sentinel  in 
the  heart  whenever  power  is  abused.  Why  this  passion  so 
wide-spread  in  our  nature?  Why  search  through  every  grade 
of  the  animal  kingdom, — do  we  see  its  developments  where 
injury  is  threatened?  Evidently  because  in  the  world  it  acts 
as  a  safeguard,  as  an  indispensable  protection  under  innume- 
rable circumstances.  It  disarms  the  strong  of  their  greatest 
power, — it  keeps  watch  over  the  feebleness  of  the  weak, 
giving  upon  emergencies  an  unwonted  power  of  defense. 
Thus,  while  fear  is  most  useful  at  times  to  enable  us  to  escape 
from  anger,  anger  is  equally  serviceable  to  us  often  to  meet 
it.  The  one  inspires  caution,  the  other  courage.  Most  ap- 
propriately has  Brown  shown  the  value  of  this  principle  of 
our  nature. 

"  What  should  we  think  of  the  providence  of  nature,  if 

(125) 


126  ANGER  AND  SHAME, 

when  aggression  was  threatened  against  the  weak  and  un- 
armed, at  a  distance  from  the  aid  of  others,  there  were 
instantly  and  uniformly  by  the  intervention  of  some  wonder- 
working power  to  rush  into  the  hands  of  the  defenseless  a 
sword,  or  other  weapon  of  defense  ?  And  yet  this  w^ould  be 
but  a  feeble  assistance  if  compared  with  that  which  we  re- 
ceive from  the  simple  emotions  which  Heaven  has  caused  to 
rush,  as  it  were,  into  our  mind  for  repelling  every  attack." 

Thus  the  principle  of  anger,  in  its  instinctive  exercise,  is 
made  by  God  to  subserve  the  highest  benefit.  jSTature  re- 
veals as  truly  the  design  of  God  to  make  it  a  weapon  of 
defense,  as  if  some  immediate  interposition  of  divine  power 
was  exhibited.  The  whole  world  declares  its  adaptation 
under  suitable  restraints  for  the  purposes  of  life,  and  its 
indispensable  use  in  the  economy  of  nature. 

But  the  emotion  of  shame  also  subserves  a  most  useful  end, 
as  the  defense  of  modesty  and  a  restraining  power  in  the 
mind  of  the  impure.  Thus,  this  principle  acts  as  a  great  wall 
of  defense  to  society.  Commencing  so  early  in  our  nature 
it  suppresses  innumerable  outbreaks  of  depravity.  Its  influ- 
ence being  internal,  it  operates  upon  one  side  to  check 
aggressions,  and  upon  the  other  to  defend  from  unlawful  in- 
dulgence. Thus,  within  the  mind  it  is  an  ever-present 
monitor  of  conduct,  a  vigilant  sentinel  upon  the  rights  of 
moral  purity.  The  ways  in  which  the  emotion  of  shame 
acts  upon  society  are  innumerable.  Thus,  often  when  other 
motives  fail  of  making  their  influence  effectual,  shame  comes 
in  as  a  last  resort,  and  saves  from  ruin  where  nobler  senti- 
ments fail.  How  frequently  is  this  principle  seen  in  the  con- 
dition of  the  individual,  as  securing  an  end  of  the  greatest 
value  !  How  often  are  the  multitude  restrained  from  ex- 
cesses by  this  principle,  that  otherwise  it  would  fall  into ! 
The  great  power  of  shame  is  seen  from  the  manner  in  which 
it  touches  upon  the  sensibility  of  pride,  or  the  feeling  of  self- 
respect.  Thus,  when  called  into  action  it  directly  awakens 
emotions  in  the  heart,  that  with  silent  yet  resistless  energy 
often  controls  the  whole  mind.  History  is  full  of  the  devel- 
opments of  this  principle,  influencing  even  millions  when  cir- 


THE  LOVE   OF  AMITY,  ETC.  127 

ciimstances  powerfully  call  it  forth.  Thus,  the  shame  of 
defeat  in  war  is  often  the  sole  protection  of  the  soldier. 
Thus,  honor  and  shame  operate  as  powerful  incentives  to 
action, — the  former  a  grateful,  the  latter  a  humiliating  emo- 
tion of  the  heart.  One  feeling  is  the  reverse  of  the  other, 
and  yet  neither  can  be  spared  in  the  complex  machinery  of 
our  nature. 

There  is  a  class  of  the  aiFections  indispensable  in  the 
economy  of  life,  which  reveal  in  a  high  degree  divine  skill 
and  benevolence.  We  refer  to  the  love  of  family,  society, 
and  the  possession  of  property.  Suppose,  for  a  moment,  the 
love  of  family,  comprehending  the  affection  of  parents  to  their 
children,  or  children  to  their  parents  and  each  other,  was 
unknown, — suppose  this  mighty  principle  obliterated,  w^here 
would  society  be  ?  Where  would  the  world  be  ?  Society  is 
made  up  of  families,  but  what  could  keep  families  together 
with  the  absence  of  the  principle  of  affection  ? 

How  could  society  stand  the  shock  of  the  sundering  of  the 
million  secret  ties  that  bind  parents  to  children,  and  children 
to  parents  ?  Where  would  be  the  means  of  support  to  those 
too  weak  or  too  helpless  to  secure  support  for  themselves  ? 
Where  would  be  the  care  of  the  strong  for  the  weak,  or 
those  countless  attentions  that  make  up  the  everyday  scenes 
of  existence  ?  Look  upon  society  !  the  bond  that  keeps 
society  together  is  a  vastly  stronger  bond  than  civil  govern- 
ment. It  is  the  affection  that  reigns  in  the  family  circle,  the 
principle  that  leads  the  individuals  of  a  family  to  care  for 
each  other.  Thus,  within  the  family  are  seen  the  deepest 
sympathies.  The  circle  of  affection  to  be  strong  must  be 
small :  general  philanthropy  may  do  for  the  mass, — the  im- 
pulse of  mutual  good  will  may  subserve  a  most  useful  end  to 
the  multitude ;  but  the  family  demands  something  stronger 
than  all  this.  It  demands  concentration  of  affection,  not  a  dif- 
fusion of  it.  It  demands  a  singleness  of  good  will,  not  gen- 
eral philanthropy.  The  family  to  exist  must  have  something 
direct,  positive,  and  immediate  in  the  affections.  Love  must 
show  itself  as  self-sacrificing.  The  tie  that  binds  the  family 
in   the    strongest   way  together,  binds   also   the    State   the 


128  ANGER   AND  SHAME, 

stronger  together,  for  the  family  calls  into  constant  exercise 
the  principle  of  subordination, — there  are  learnt  those  lessons 
of  obedience  that  give  security  to  the  State.  But  the  affec- 
tion of  the  family  calls  into  constant  exercise  the  principle  of 
industry,  of  foresight,  of  disinterestedness,  of  kind  and  gen- 
erous sympathy.  Thus,  the  mother  forgets  herself  in  her 
care  for  her  infant,  the  father  toils  for  his  children,  the  chil- 
dren obey  and  become  the  support  of  their  parents.  Thus, 
the  family  is  the  nursery  of  the  purest  emotions  of  our  na- 
ture. If  its  cares  are  great,  its  joys  are  greater.  It  brings 
into  action  the  unselfish  feelings  of  our  nature.  The  small- 
jiess  of  the  family  circle  only  makes  it  the  stronger.  While 
affection  by  general  philanthropy  is  dissipated,  by  particular 
philanthropy  it  is  concentrated,  so  that  the  family  is  best 
adapted  for  the  nursery  of  virtue.  It  preserves  from  ruin 
millions  of  the  human  race.  It  throws  a  shield  of  defense, 
the  best  the  world  knows  of,  over  the  infancy  and  childhood 
of  humanit}^  leading  it  up  step  by  step  into  the  power  of  self- 
preservation,  so  that  the  family  affection  is  not  only  the  sen- 
tinel that  stands  at  the  door  of  general  dissoluteness,  but  the 
highest  safety  of  society,  keeping  it  from  moral  earthquakes 
and  volcanoes,  from  tempests  of  enraged  elements  that  other- 
wise would  rend  it  into  pieces,  shatter  the  body  politic  into 
a  thousand  fragments,  and  light  up  all  over  the  world  funeral 
piles  of  ruin.  God  never  saves  the  State  by  overlooking  the 
family, — he  gives  that  principle  of  affection  that  creates  the 
subordination  of  the  little  circle  of  home,  and  then  widens 
that  circle  to  comprise  the  State. 

But  the  love  of  possession  is  also  a  strong  principle  im- 
planted by  God  to  cement  society  together.  Thus,  we  see  the 
first  care  of  society  is  to  protect  the  rights  of  property,  for  the 
rights  of  property  are  essential  for  industry',  perseverance,  and 
foresight.  Take  away  all  security  to  property,  and  industry' 
and  all  the  energies  of  a  State  are  destroyed.  Poverty,  want, 
ruin,  come  rapidly  on  ;  consequently  all  government  fences 
round  the  property  of  the  individual  with  a  strong  wall.  The 
love  of  possession  may  degenerate  into  avarice, — it  may  be 
abused  like  every  other  natural  principle  of  our  nature, — but 


THE  LOVE   OF  AMITY,  ETC.  129 

God  gave  it  for  the  wisest  end,  even  to  be  next  to  the  family 
circle  the  strongest  cement  of  society.  As  property  is  diftused 
among  the  masses  it  leads  to  the  fear  of  novel  changes,  and 
imparts  a  dread  of  revolutions,  so  that  the  middle  class  be- 
comes mighty  and  the  extremes  of  society  weak,  so  that 
permanence  is  given,  and  the  love  of  mutual  subordination 
strengthened.  True  liberty  dies  out  with  the  great  weaken- 
ing or  dissolution  of  the  ties  of  property.  General  insecurity 
is  fatal  to  liberty.  When  there  is  no  respect  for  the  rights  of 
property,  society  rushes  into  anarchy,  and  anarchy,  to  avoid  a 
worse  evil,  rushes  into  despotism.  Despotism,  then,  for  self- 
defense,  invokes  the  power  of  the  sword,  and  the  violence  of 
war  buries  up  in  its  gory  bed  the  dearest  rights  of  man. 

Thus,  under  whatever  aspect  we  may  regard  the  constitu- 
tion of  man,  we  see  in  the  workmanship  of  God  the  eternal 
impress  of  his  wisdom  and  goodness. 

9 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

OMNISCIENCE,  OMNIPRESENCE,  AND    SPIRITUALITY    OF    GOD. 

In  respect  to  the  omniscience  and  omnipresence  of  God,  it 
need  only  be  said  that  the  mind  can  no  more  in  the  works  of 
nature  limit  the  presence  or  the  observation  of  God,  than 
the  power  or  wisdom  or  beneficence  of  God.  As  the  essence 
of  God  must  be  forever  beyond  the  reach  of  our  faculties,  so 
must  also  the  mode  of  the  exercise  of  the  attributes  of  God. 
Where  there  is  the  action  of  the  power  of  God,  there  must  be 
his  presence,  and  where  there  is  his  presence  there  must  be 
his  observation.  It  is  vain  to  speak  of  the  attributes  of  God 
except  in  that  popular  language  understood  by  all.  We  can 
know  nothing  of  the  attributes  of  God  except  from  their 
manifestation,  and  from  the  exercise  of  reason  and  that  light 
which  comes  to  us  from  Nature  and  Revelation.  From  this 
we  are  led  to  the  conviction  that  the  action  of  the  Deity  in- 
cludes his  presence,  and  his  presence  his  perception.  But 
how  amazing  is  the  idea  of  that  great  Being  who  is  present 
wherever  there  is  the  work  of  his  hands !  who  sees  all 
things  in  the  wide  universe;  whose  mind,  unlimited  in 
thought,  takes  into  one  view  all  the  myriads  of  worlds  that 
people  the  immensity  of  space  !  What  boundless  grandeur 
must  belong  to  him  who  embraces  within  the  ample  range 
of  his  vision  the  countless  revolutions  of  suns  and  planets; 
who,  undistracted  with  the  diversity  of  his  cares,  can  give  an 
equal  notice  to  the  smallest  as  to  the  greatest  of  his  works ! 
The  mind  of  the  creature  is  soon  weary  with  thought,  and 
the  brightest  genius  feebly  flutters  in  its  upward  flight;  but 
the  mind  of  God  never  tires,  his  eye  never  sleeps.  There  is 
no  darkness  with  him.  All  is  open  as  the  day.  The  worm 
that  crawls  in  the  dust  is  not  unobserved.  The  rustling  of  a 
forest  leaf  in  the  wind  is  heard  as  distinctly  as  the  music  of  a 
(130) 


OMNISCIENCE,  OMNIPRESENCE,  ETC.  OF  GOD.      131 

clioir  of  angels.  Imperfection  marks  the  creature,  perfection 
the  Creator. 

"  The  omnipresence  of  God,"  sajs  Dewar,  "  is  necessarily 
implied  in  his  infinite  perfection.  If  there  be  no  perfection 
wanting  in  a  being  who  is  infinitely  perfect,  and  if  it  be  a 
perfection  to  be  present  everywhere,  and  at  the  same  time  ; 
to  be  present  everywhere,  not  successively  by  motion,  but 
without  motion,  then  it  follows  that  the  all-perfect  God  is 
omnipresent,  infinite  in  himself,  what  power  is  there  without 
him  to  bound  his  nature  and  essence  to  time  or  space  ;  or 
can  we  conceive  that  he  would  voluntarily  place  any  restraint 
on  himself?  Immutable  in  his  being  and  perfections,  it  can- 
not be  said  of  him,  that  there  is  any  place  in  heaven,  or  in 
earth,  or  in  the  boundless  void  of  space  from  which  he  is 
absent ;  or  that  he  moves  from  one  place  to  another. 
Almighty  in  his  power,  what  is  there  to  limit  him  in  creating 
and  in  peopling  many  millions  of  worlds  through  an  eternity 
to  come  ?  And  must  not  he  who  forms  be  present  in  the 
formation  of  his  works,  which  he  makes,  and  continues  to  be 
present  to  direct  and  uphold  them  ?  This  was  the  induction  of 
the  Apostle  when  persuading  the  Athenians  of  the  omnipres- 
ence of  God.  He  is  not  far  from  every  one  of  us,  '  for  in  him 
we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our  being.'  '  If  we  have  life,  and 
breath,  and  all  things,  he  from  whom  we  receive  them  must 
be  in  us  and  around  us.'  '  We  are  placed  on  a  theater  on 
which  we,  and  everything  about  us,  are  exhibiting  the  pres- 
ence of  God  in  all  the  power  and  benignity  of  his  nature; 
and  if  we  are  not  yet  admitted  into  the  place  of  his  peculiar 
glory,  we  are  allowed  constantly  to  witness  the  excellence  of 
his  working,  and  the  wisdom  of  his  councils.'  " 

The  great  idea  that  God  is  a  spirit  is  the  necessary  deduc- 
tion from  his  omnipresence  and  omniscience.  His  infinite 
power  and  wisdom  could  not  admit  of  that  limitation  included 
in  the  very  essence  of  matter.  All  that  we  can  know  of  the  na- 
ture of  God  must  be  from  the  developments  of  that  nature. 
But  nature  presents  her  proofs  of  design  ;  power  is  seen  in  her 
countless  changes.  The  revolutions  of  myriads  of  worlds  re- 
veal the  amazing  power  of  God.     But  how  is  the  infinite  to  be 


132  OMNISCIENCE,  OMNIPRESENCE, 

confined  to  matter  ?  Matter  is  finite  :  it  is  and  must  be  limited 
in  space.  Matter  is  unintelligent:  it  thinks  not  nor  reasons. 
Spiritualize  nature  as  much  as  we  please  we  can  never  im- 
part to  it  thought.  Materialize  mind  as  much  as  we  please 
we  cannot  give  to  it  divisibility,  extension,  form,  weight,  and 
color.  Mind  acts,  matter  is  acted  upon.  To  make  God  ma- 
terial, or  compound  him  of  mind  and  matter,  is  essentially  to 
limit  him  in  his  very  nature.  It  is  to  make  him  necessarily 
imperfect.  If  God  be  not  in  his  nature  spiritual,  an  infinite 
spirit,  then  he  could  not  have  unlimited  power,  he  could  not 
be  present  over  his  wide  universe,  nor  could  his  knowledge 
extend  to  all  events.  Our  most  exalted  idea  of  a  substance 
is  that  it  thinks  and  reasons.  But  when  we  look  upon  the 
substance  of  God  as  material,  then  we  degrade  God  immeas- 
urably. To  ascribe  matter  to  God,  however  we  may  modify 
its  nature  or  existence,  must  be  infinitely  unworthy  of  God. 
But  the  very  idea  of  power  in  its  noblest  exercise  precludes 
ascribing  matter  to  God.  God  being  self-existent  must  be 
an  infinitely  self-active  and  powerful  being.  Could  God's 
power  be  manifest  over  the  whole  universe  if  it  was  limited 
to  any  material  substance  ?  Could  God  be  omnipresent  if  he 
was  circumscribed  to  the  sphere  of  matter  ?  Can  that  which 
must  be  bounded  by  measurement  and  limited  in  space,  be 
appropriate  to  the  nature  of  God  ?  God  must  be  the  author 
of  matter,  or  matter  the  author  of  God.  But  matter  cannot 
be  the  author  of  God,  for  then  it  would  be  eternal ;  then  it 
would  have  a  prior  existence  to  God  ;  then  that  which  is  acted 
upon  would  originate  that  which  acts  ;  then  the  limited  and 
the  finite  would  be  superior  to  the  unlimited  and  infinite ; 
then  that  which  has  no  thought  would  be  superior  to  that 
which  thinks;  then  the  material  would  excel  the  spiritual; 
then  matter  would  be  God,  and  God  matter;  then  the  idea 
of  finite  spirits  would  be  absurd.  If  God  was  material  there 
would  be  nothing  that  was  not  material.  The  fundamental 
distinction  of  soul  and  body  w^ould  be  lost;  there  could  be  no 
such  thing  as  soul  and  body,  and  all  thoughts  would  be  only 
refined  materialism.  Thus  all  lofty  and  good  ideas  of  God, 
all  ideas  coexistent  with  the  phenomena  of  nature,  make  out 


AND   SPIRITUALITY  OF  GOB.  I33 

God  to  be  spiritual,  and  the  infinite  source  of  all  knowledge, 
wisdom,  and  power.  We  can  never  conceive  of  God  as  in 
any  sense  restricted  in  time  or  space.  We  cannot  limit  him 
in  any  of  his  attributes;  especially  his  nature  must  be  infi- 
nitely superior  to  all  matter:  mystery  the  most  unexplained 
rests  upon  the  origin  of  matter,  but  no  obscurity  upon  the 
fact  itself  that  God  made  matter,  and  that  it  is  not  a  part  of 
his  nature.  The  omnipresence  and  omniscience  of  God  both 
preclude  the  materiality  of  God,  for  the  moment  we  think  of 
God  in  any  other  light  than  as  a  spirit,  everywhere  present 
and  possessed  of  all  knowledge  and  power,  then  we  set  limits 
to  God.  Our  idea  of  the  perfection  of  God  forcibly  confirms 
the  fact  of  his  spirituality.  The  attributes  of  God  are  in 
tlieir  nature  so  peculiar  and  so  wonderful  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  think  of  God  in  his  essence  other  than  as  an  infinite 
spirit.  Everything  that  carries  with  it  the  idea  of  inferiority 
must  be  carefully  excluded  from  God.  There  is  that  in  our 
deepest  nature  which  teaches  us  there  is  something  with- 
out us  and  above  us  ;  something  self-caused  and  self-existent ; 
something  that  cannot  be  circumscribed  in  space,  or  compre- 
hended by  finite  thought;  something  that  is  independent  of 
all  other  things,  and  upon  whom  all  other  things  depend; 
something  that  is  boundless  in  every  direction,  and  unlimited 
in  thought,  feeling,  purpose,  and  mind  ;  something  that  made 
all  creatures  and  all  worlds,  and  of  which  no  language  is  ap- 
propriate except  that  embodied  in  the  w^ords,  the  Infinite  and 
the  Perfect. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

THE  EQUITY  AND  BENEVOLENCE  OF  GOD  SHOWN  FROM  THE 
MORAL  CONSTITUTION  OF  MAN. 

What  may  be  the  voluntary  perversion  of  the  moral  work- 
manship of  God  is  altogether  distinct  from  the  fact  as  to  what 
was  that  workmanship  as  it  came  from  God.  W"e  are  to  con- 
sider not  the  debasement  of  man's  moral  nature,  but  the  ac- 
tual condition  of  that  nature  bestowed  by  God.  Suppose  we 
are  called  to  see  the  painting  of  some  great  artist :  that  paint- 
ing may  be  old,  or  defaced  by  careless  usage,  and  yet  from 
the  lineaments  that  remain,  althoagh  greatly  imperfect,  we 
may  come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  the  creation  of  genius. 
In  man's  moral  nature,  injured  as  it  may  be  hy  sin,  there  is 
yet  seen  in  conscience  the  workmanship  of  God. 

Let  us,  then,  examine  the  nature  of  conscience ;  let  us  see 
what  is  the  work  of  our  moral  sensibilities,  and  then  directly 
do  we,  from  the  character  of  the  divine  workmanship,  come 
to  the  conclusion  of  his  equity  and  benevolence.  There  are 
those  who  have  confined  the  argument  upon  the  benevolence 
of  God  alone,  to  the  fact  of  the  vast  amount  of  happiness  ex- 
isting in  the  world.  Having  in  one  scale  weighed  the  misery 
existing,  and  in  the  other  scale  the  happiness  prevailing 
among  the  difi'erent  creatures  made  by  God,  and  found  that 
misery  was  the  exception  and  happiness  the  rule,  they  have 
therefore  with  good  reason  inferred  the  benevolence  of  God. 

But  consider  that  duty,  right,  srnd  not  happiness  is  the  great 
idea  upon  which  we  base  the  equity  and  benevolence  of  God. 
It  is  because  what  he  has  made  is  right,  what  he  demands  is 
duty,  that  chiefly  we  infer  the  divine  goodness.  "When  we 
enter  upon  the  question  of  the  amount  of  happiness  exist- 
ing, the  adaptation  of  the  works  of  ci'eation  to  produce 
pleasure,  we  do  indeed  find  in  these  things  a  high  proof  of 
.   (134) 


THE  EQUITY  AND    BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.      135 

the  benevolence  of  God.  But  yet  miseiy  exists,  and  the  ob- 
jection pi-esents  itself  of  moral  evil.  To  meet  that  objection 
we  must  stand  upon  different  ground  than  that  presented  in 
the  happiness  theory, — we  must  go  to  the  fundamental  idea 
of  virtue,  beyond  which  we  cannot  proceed  farther,  even  to 
that  wall  of  adamant  spoken  of  by  Mackintosh,  "which 
bounds  human  inquiry  (and  which  has  scarcely)  ever  been 
discovered  b}'  any  adventurer,  until  he  was  roused  by  the 
shock  which  drove  him  back."  What  is  that  wall  of  ada- 
mant, where  all  discovery  must  stop,  which  is  the  foundation 
of  all  ethics,  and  even  the  immutable  basis  upon  which  divine 
law  and  authority  rests  ?  Is  it  not  the  idea  of  right,  of  duty  ? 
It  is  no  adequate  definition  of  virtue  to  say  that  it  is  useful, 
it  produces  happiness,  it  accords  with  the  fitness  of  things,  it 
is  order,  divine  harmon}',  it  is  moral  beauty.  These  are  the 
fruits  or  the  tendencies  of  virtue.  The  question  presents  itself, 
why  is  virtue  useful  ?  Why  does  it  produce  happiness,  or 
accord  with  the  fitness  of  things  ?  Why  does  it  engender 
order,  divine  harmony,  or  moral  beauty  ?  Why  is  virtue  to 
be  supremely  loved  and  obeyed  ?  Why  is  its  opposite  ever 
to  be  rejected  and  worthy  of  hate?  It  is  in  the  solutions  to 
such  a  question  that  conscience  comes  in  with  an  answer 
alike  infallible  and  immutable.  It  does  not  say  that  virtue 
is  to  be  loved  and  vice  hated,  simply  because  the  one  is 
useful  and  the  other  the  reverse, — that  the  one  represents 
order,  fitness,  and  moral  beauty,  and  the  other  engenders  dis- 
order, contention,  and  deformity.  There  are  reasons  why  it 
would  be  the  part  of  wisdom  in  us  to  be  virtuous  and  not 
vicious.  But  the  fruits  of  a  tree  do  not  constitute  the  tree 
itself.  Beyond  these  reasons,  there  is  the  ultimate  reason, 
the  wall  of  adamant  that  stops  all  farther  inquiry,  and  makes 
known  the  last  element  of  all  ethics.  Virtue  is  virtue,  because 
it  is  right;  because  conscience  pronounces  upon  it  the  approv- 
ing verdict  of  duty.  Vice  is  vice  because  it  is  wrong,  and  con- 
science when  it  sees  vice  as  vice  declares  it  to  be  wrong. 
Farther  than  this  we  cannot  go  in  our  last  analysis  of  virtue 
and  vice ;  here  we  reach  the  essential  element  in  the  nature 
of  virtue  and  vice  which  engenders  the  fruit  of  usefulness  or 


186  THE  EQUITY  AND 

uselessness,  happiness  or  misery,  order  or  disorder,  beauty  or 
deformity.  The  question  then  that  is  peculiarly  to  test  the 
fact  of  the  equity  and  benevolence  of  God  is  simply,  lohat  is 
the  moral  constitution  of  man  ?  not  what  is  the  moral  consti- 
tution in  its  state  as  perverted  by  man,  but  what  is  his  moral 
constitution  as  originally  given  by  God?  What  are  those 
moral  sensibilities  as  created  in  us  by  the  Deity?  There  is  a 
wide  distinction  between  power  or  faculty  granted  by  God, 
and  the  abuse  of  that  power  or  faculty.  ]S"o  one  would  infer 
that  a  steam-engine  dashing  itself  upon  the  rocks  was 
made  for  this  end.  The  construction  of  the  steam-engine 
shows  that  its  true  sphere  was  the  railroad,  and  that  it  was 
designed  for  the  purpose  of  rapidity,  yet  safely  conveying  in 
cars  passengers  and  merchandise  over  the  road.  Even  in  its 
greatest  power  of  mischief  by  abuse,  there  is  made  known 
wisdom  and  benevolence  in  its  construction.  The  abuse  of 
the  engine  is  not  the  end,  but  the  perversion  of  the  end  for 
which  it  was  made.  So  of  our  moral  constitution  :  it  shows 
the  wisdom  and  benevolence  of  its  great  author,  even  when 
most  fearfully  perverted.  All  can  see  the  use  of  a  compass 
in  the  ship  upon  the  wide  ocean,  and  although  by  careless- 
ness that  compass  may  prove  a  great  source  of  mischief,  yet 
the  end  for  which  it  was  made  was  beneficent.  We  right- 
fully then  discriminate  between  a  thing  and  its  abuse,  power 
and  its  perversion,  faculty  and  its  derangement.  So  in  the 
consideration  of  the  moral  constitution  of  man :  we  must  look 
away  from  its  derangement  by  sin,  to  the  thing  itself;  we 
must  view  it  as  it  might  be  and  should  be,  rather  than  as  it 
appears  in  its  ruin.  Take  the  human  body  in  the  full  tide  of 
health  and  the  same  body  prostrated  by  disease,  and  how 
mighty  the  contrast !  But  who,  in  viewing  the  body  loath- 
some with  the  ravages  of  a  mortal  distemper,  the  limbs  use- 
less for  service,  the  ear  dull  of  hearing,  the  eye  blind  to  the 
external  world,  and  the  clammy  sweat  of  death  gathering 
over  the  form  of  man,  would  say  this  was  the  end  for  which 
the  senses  were  made ;  this  the  purpose  which  is  made 
known  in  the  limbs;  this  the  use  of  the  whole  mechanism 
of  the  body  ?     ISTot  so.     The  derangement  or  dissolution  of 


BENEVOLENCE   OF   GOD.  137 

the  animal  economy  was  not  the  design  of  that  economy  ;  the 
cessation  of  its  use  was  not  the  use  itself  Death  may  be  a 
necessary  condition  of  animals  in  this  world,  and  through  sin 
in  man  it  may  and  is  wisely  ordained  by  God  to  befall  the 
human  race;  but  this  is  not  the  design  or  great  end  to  be  sub- 
served in  the  animal  economy.  So  also  by  sin  we  see  the 
moral  constitution  in  disorder  and  ruin;  but  as  made  by  God 
it  reveals  in  the  clearest  light  his  equity  and  benevolence. 

Here  is  the  conscience,  God's  own  workmanship,  in  the 
heart  of  man  as  much  as  the  intellect  or  the  body.  Does 
that  conscience  when  it  sees  a  thing  to  be  virtuous  approve 
of  it?  Does  the  conscience  command  us  to  do  what  we  feel 
to  be  duty,  and  as  authoritative)}'  demand  that  we  should  not 
commit  %m^  when  sin  is  seen  to  he  sin?  The  question  is  not 
what  conscience  actually  does  do  when  abused,  but  simply 
what  is  the  nature  of  conscience  unperverted, — what  are  its 
decisions  in  a  healthy  state^?  We  are  to  look  upon  con- 
science in  its  exercise  just  as  we  look  upon  a  steam-engine 
or  a  compass ;  we  judge  of  the  wisdom  and  beneficence  of 
their  workmanship  simpl}'  by  what  the  steam-engine  or  com- 
pass can  or  will  do  in  tlieir  appropriate  sphere.  The  disas- 
ters that  will  attend  the  wrong  use  of  these  instruments  in 
no  respect  affect  the  utility  or  wisdom  of  their  construction. 

In  the  same  wa}^  must  we  look  to  the  conscience  as  reveal- 
ing the  equity  and  benevolence  of  God.  Some  confound 
conscience  with  virtue.  As  well  may  a  man  confound  the  axe 
that  cuts  the  wood  with  the  wood  itself.  Virtue  is  an  effect, 
conscience  an  instrument;  virtue  is  good  done,  conscience 
that  which  urges  to  good  and  approves  of  it ;  virtue  is  right 
action,  conscience  that  which  constitutes  the  faculty  of  right 
action.  Thus,  conscience  and  virtue  stand  related  to  each 
other  as  agent  and  action,  instrument  and  effect.  To  see  in 
conscience  the  evidence  of  the  equity  and  benevolence  of 
God,  we  must  view  it  especially  in  what  it  is  designed  to  do; 
we  must  look  upon  it  as  an  instrument  made  by  God  for  the 
wisest  end.  Nothing  is  more  mournful  than  to  see  the  per- 
version of  conscience,  and  yet  the  fact  that  in  different  persons 
its  decisions  are  so  diverse,  is  owinof  to  the  use  of  conscience 


138  THE  EQUITY  AND 

out  of  the  appropriate  conditions  of  its  sphere.  There  is  not 
one  of  the  senses  that  will  not  deceive  when  abused  in  its 
exercise.  The  faculties  of  sight,  hearing,  taste,  touch,  and 
smelling  will  all  be  exercised  under  certain  appropriate  con- 
ditions. The  senses  as  truly  give  to  us  wrong  ideas  of  the 
external  world  out  of  their  sphere,  as  they  never  mislead  us 
when  exercised  in  their  sphere.  But  does  this  fact  ever  lead 
us  to  underrate  the  value  of  the  senses  ?  Are  we  ever  dis- 
posed to  think  them  useless,  because  of  the  mistakes  we  often 
fall  into  by  their  wrong  use?  Because  the  senses  are  limited 
in  their  range  of  operation,  do  we  therefore  infer  that  God  is 
not  wise  and  good  in  giving  to  us  the  senses  ?  But  the 
senses  are  only  the  instruments  of  the  body,  just  as  the  con- 
science is  the  instrument  of  the  soul.  The  dift'erence  is 
simply  that  the  former  is  material  while  the  latter  is  im- 
material. Consequently  we  find  that  conscience  is  a  facult}' 
exclusively  pertaining  to  a  moral  agent,  and  if  the  abuse  of 
the  senses  is  no  argument  against  the  wisdom  and  benefi- 
cence of  God  in  their  creation,  equally  true  is  it  that  the 
perversions  of  conscience  do  not  infringe  upon  the  equity  and 
the  goodness  of  God.  As  we  look  in  physics  upon  the  senses 
as  instruments,  so  also  in  ethics  we  must  look  upon  the  con-- 
science.  As  in  the  former  we  can  show  wisdom  and  benefi- 
cence in  God  by  tlieir  legitimate  use,  so  also  we  can  in  the 
latter.  The  natural  world  reveals  no  more  clearly  the  char- 
acter of  God  than  the  moral  world.  While  nature  throws 
light  upon  the  natural  attributes  of  God,  so  with  truth  it  may 
be  said  that  the  moral  constitution  of  man  peculiarly  displays 
the  moral  attributes  of  God. 

The  peculiar  prerogative  of  the  conscience  is  that  it  does 
not  look  to  the  consequences  of  a  thing,  so  much  as  the  thing 
itself.  The  conscience  does  not  say.  Do  such  a  thing  because 
it  is  useful,  but  because  it  is  right.  Its  language  is  not.  Avoid 
such  a  thing  becausse  it  engenders  misery,  but  because  it  is 
wrong.  It  is  the  intellect  that  weighs  in  the  balances  conse- 
quences. The  sphere  of  the  conscience  is  restricted  to  the 
right  and  wrong  of  conduct.  The  conscience  alone  takes  cog- 
nizance of  the  internal  state  of  a  moral  accent.     It  is  not  the 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  139 

will  of  God  that  makes  his  own  nature  virtuous,  but  his  na- 
ture that  makes  his  will  virtuous.  Conscience  in  man,  when 
unperverted,  is  an  indication  of  what  is  the  moral  character 
of  God.  As  God's  workmanship,  it  tells  not  so  much  what  is 
the  Divine  will,  as  what  more  comprehensively  is  his  moral 
character,  including  his  nature  and  will.  Can  then  there  be 
a  doubt  that  if  the  conscience  approves  of  the  right,  when 
seen  as  such,  and  condemns  the  wrong, — if,  even  amid  the 
ruins  of  our  moral  nature  it  speaks  of  duty,  of  obligation,  and 
enforces  right  by  its  own  peculiar  sanctions,  that  the  great 
Author  of  conscience  must  himself  approve  of  right  and  con- 
demn wrong?  What  more  conclusive  evidence  of  the  equity 
of  God  ?  Has  God  implanted  a  law  within  the  heart  impera- 
tively demanding  right  action,  and  must  not  the  maker  of 
such  a  law  himself  supremely  love  moral  excellence,  and  hate 
sin  ?  It  is  not  said  that  conscience  and  virtue  are  the  same : 
the  fundamental  distinction  between  the  two  has  been  seen; 
but  here  is  the  question.  Does  not  conscience  in  man  that  tells 
Mm  to  be  virtuous,  that  unperverted  leads  to  it,  that  guides 
as  an  instrument,  when  not  abused,  to  virtue,  that  approves 
of  the  right  wherever  seen,  and  rebukes  for  wrong  whenever 
felt, — is  not  such  a  faculty  a  clear  mark  of  the  equity  and 
goodness  of  its  author  ?  Can  we  for  a  moment  believe  that 
the  Deity  gave  man  a  moral  nature  that  must  condemn  him- 
self, and  compel  him  to  despise  the  author  of  his  existence  ? 
Certainly  there  can  be  no  supposition  so  absurd  as  that  God 
would  6e^fe  himself  in  his  own  work.  Man's  work  and  God's 
work  are  tw^o  things  altogether  different.  Man's  work  may 
and  does  often  cast  reproach  upon  God,  but  God's  work 
never.  God  never  would  give  moral  sensibilities  that  the 
more  virtuous  in  man,  the  more  they  w^ould  lead  to  the 
contempt  of  their  great  author.  As  God  can  never  hate  him- 
self, so  never  can  he  hate  or  be  hated  by  his  own  work  apart 
from  the  abuse  of  that  work.  The  essential  idea  to  be  dwelt 
upon  in  considering  conscience  is,  not  what  conscience  actually 
does  do  in  its  abuse,  but  simply  what  conscience  can  do 
and  would  do  when  used  as  God  meant  it  to  be  used.  Unless 
this  distinction  in  ethics  is  always  kept  in  mind,  the  contem- 


140  THE  EQUITY  AND 

platiou  of  conscience,  as  perverted  in  fallen  nature,  will  be 
more  likelj'  to  throw  darkness  than  light  upon  the  moral 
attributes  of  God.  Great  as  may  be  the  disorder  in  the 
natural  world,  as  the  consequence  of  sin,  yet  the  impartial 
observer  of  human  nature  is  compelled  to  admit  a  disorder 
vastly  greater  in  the  moral  world,  the  efiect  of  sin. 

In  contemplating  conscience,  a  great  allowance  must  be 
made  for  sin,  even  as  in  mechanics  the  calculator  of  physical 
forces  always  leaves  a  wide  margin  for  the  law  of  friction. 
The  distinctive  element  of  sin  has  entered  the  moral  world, 
and  its  worst  power  is  seen  in  perverting  and  blinding  the 
conscience.  We  do  not  see  conscience  in  man  as  it  is  un- 
folded in  angels;  nor  is  it  now  in  man,  as  it  will  be  in  man 
perfectly  redeemed  from  the  curse  of  sin  ;  but  this  fact  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  question,  Is  not  the  equity  and  the 
benevolence  of  God  shown  from  the  moral  constitution  of 
man  ?  Is  not  the  conscience  which  makes  known  the  moral 
constitution  of  man  an  instrument  in  itself,  as  given  by  God, 
wise,  and  good,  and  just?  When  we  discriminate  between 
a  thing  and  the  abuse  of  a  thing,  then  are  we  prepared  suita- 
bly to  view  the  goodness  of  God  in  granting  to  man  a  con- 
science. The  conscience,  in  its  proj^er  exercise,  is  the  moral 
image  of  God.  When  the  conscience  tells  us  to  do  what  is  good 
and  to  avoid  what  is  evil,  when  it  approves  of  what  is  right 
and  condemns  the  wrong,  it  reveals  as  truly  the  Divine  dis- 
position as  if  the  Deity  directly  communicated  his  will  by 
miracle.  Let  it  be  understood  that  conscience  is  simply 
spoken  of  as  a  natural  faculty  of  the  soul  in  its  unperverted 
exercise.  It  is  given  by  God  for  a  specific  end,  as  much  as  the 
eye,  the  hand,  or  the  foot.  The  eye  can  see  only  right  under 
the  appropriate  conditions  of  its  exercise;  the  ear  can  hear 
only  correctly  when  used  in  its  true  sphere;  the  hand  or 
the  foot  have  their  suitable  range  of  exercise.  So  of  the  con- 
science as  a  moral  faculty  of  the  soul ;  it  is  to  be  looked  upon 
exclusively  in  its  decisions,  under  its  own  peculiar  and  ap- 
propriate conditions  as  constituted  by  God.  Viewed  in  this 
light,  it  is  no  argument  whatever  against  the  equity  of  God 
and  his  goodness,  that  the  conscience  is  often  so  wrong,  and 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  141 

its  exercise  so  fearfully  perverted.  The  simple  question  in 
relation  to  the  conscience  is,  what  will  it  do  when  rightly 
used  ?  What  are  its  decisions  under  appropriate  and  suitable 
conditions  ? 

Let  us,  then,  consider  conscience  in  its  nature, — let  us  ex- 
amine it  as  a  law,  a  feeling,  and  a  judge, — let  us  view  it  in  its 
supremacy  over  our  nature,  and  then  may  we  read  from  its 
character  and  right  exercise  .the  clear  proof  of  the  moral  ex- 
cellence of  that  Being  who  gave  it  to  man, 

"  The  truth  seems  to  be,"  says  Sir  James  Mackintosh, 
"that  the  moral  sentiments,  in  their  mature  state,  are  a  class 
of  feelings,  which  have  no  other  object  but  the  mental  disposi- 
tions leading  to  voluntary  action,  and  the  voluntary'  actions 
which  flow  from  these  dispositions.  We  are  pleased  with  some 
dispositions  and  actions  and  displeased  with  others,  in  our- 
selves and  our  fellows.  We  desire  to  cultivate  the  dispositions, 
and  to  perform  the  actions,  which  we  contemplate  with  satis- 
faction. These  objects,  like  all  those  of  human  appetite  or  de- 
sire, are  sought  for  their  own  sake.  The  peculiarity  of  these 
desires  is,  that  their  gratification  requires  the  use  of  no  means  ; 
nothing  (unless  it  be  a  volition)  is  interposed  between  the  de- 
sire and  the  voluntary  act.  It  is  impossible,  therefore,  that 
these  passions  should  undergo  any  change  by  transfer  from 
the  end  to  the  means,  as  is  the  case  with  other  practical 
principles.  On  the  other  hand,  as  soon  as  they  are  fixed  on 
these  ends,  they  cannot  regard  any  farther  object.  When 
another  passion  prevails  over  them,  the  end  of  the  moral  is 
converted  into  a  means  of  gratification.  But  volitions  and 
actions  are  not  themselves  the  ends,  or  last  object  in  view  of 
an}'  other  desire  or  aversion.  ]^othing  stands  between  the 
moral  sentiments  and  their  object.  They  are,  as  it  were,  in 
contact  with  the  will.  It  is  this  sort  of  mental  position,  if 
the  expression  may  be  pardoned,  that  explains,  or  seems  to 
explain,  those  characteristic  properties  which  true  philoso- 
phers ascribe  to  them,  and  which  all  reflecting  men  feel  to 
belong  to  them.  Being  the  only  desires,  aversions,  senti- 
ments, or  emotions  which  regard  dispositions  and  actions, 
they   necessarili/   extend  to   the  whole   character  and  conduct, — 


142  THE  EQUITY  AND 

among-  motives  to  action  they  alone  are  justly  considered  as 
universal." 

What,  then,  is  that  source  of  knowledge  which  tells  us  that 
man  has  a  conscience,  and  for  his  conduct  is  worthy  of  ap- 
probation or  disapprobation  ?  The  reply  is,  consciousness. 
Do  we  not,  through  another  medium  than  the  observation  of 
the  senses,  have  the  idea  of  right  and  wrong,  the  feeling  of 
joy  or  love,  of  esteem  or  aversion  ?  Are  we  not  perfectly 
persuaded  of  mental  pleasure  or  pain,  of  the  character  of  our 
motives  and  conduct  as  good  or  bad  ?  If  so,  then  the  reality 
of  conscience  is  as  certain  as  consciousness :  the  existence 
of  our  moral  sensibilities  is  as  true  as  the  reality  of  our 
affections  and  intellect.  Here,  then,  is  seen  the  peculiar 
office  of  conscience.  It  is  the  regulator  in  man's  heart,  that 
is  given  by  God  to  control  his  conduct.  It  is  the  instrument 
made  by  God  to  exercise  a  universal  supremacy  over  the 
voluntary  states  of  the  mind.  Its  sphere  of  action  is  exclu- 
sively internal.  The  decision  of  conscience  is  upon  the  state 
of  man  as  a  moral  agent.  It  is  simply  upon  the  question  of 
right  and  wrong  that  it  decides. 

"  The  supreme  authority  of  conscience,"  saysDugald  Stew- 
art, "  is  felt  and  acknowledged  by  the  worst,  no  less  than  by 
the  best  of  men  ;  for  even  they  who  have  thrown  off"  all 
hypocrisy  with  the  world  are  at  pains  to  conceal  their  real 
character  from  their  own  eyes.  No  man,  even  in  soliloquy 
or  private  meditation,  avowed  to  himself  that  he  was  a 
villain ;  nor  do  I  believe  that  such  a  character  as  Joseph  in 
the  '  School  for  Scandal '  (who  is  introduced  as  reflecting 
coolly  on  his  own  knavery  and  baseness  without  any  uneasi- 
ness but  what  arises  from  the  dread  of  detection)  ever  existed 
in  the  world.  Such  men  probably  impose  upon  themselves 
fully  as  much  as  they  do  upon  others."  Says  Lord  Shaftes- 
bury, as  quoted  by  Stewart,  "We  may  defend  villainy,  and 
cry  up  folly  before  the  world,  but  to  appear  fools,  madmen, 
or  varlets  to  ourselves,  and  prove  to  our  faces  that  we  are 
really  such,  is  insupportable.  For  so  true  a  reverence  has 
every  one  for  himself  when  he  comes  clearly  to  appear  before 
his   close  companion,  that  he  had  rather  profess  the  vilest 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  143 

things  of  himself  in  open  company  than  hear  his  character 
privately  from  his  own  mouth.  So  that  we  may  readily  from 
hence  conclude  that  the  chief  interest  of  ambition,  avarice, 
corruption,  and  every  sly  insinuating  vice,  is  to  prevent  this 
interview  and  familiarity  of  discourse,  which  is  consequent 
upon  close  retirement  and  inward  recess." 

In  considering  the  nature  of  conscience  one  most  important 
question  presents  itself.  What  is  the  relation  of  the  intellect 
to  the  moral  sense?  "We  can  all  of  us  see  a  vast  difference 
between  the  perception  of  an  intellectual  truth  and  the  feel- 
ing of  obligation.  In  respect  to  the  sensibility  of  right 
and  wrong,  the  distinction  is  fundamental  between  this  and 
the  perception  of  the  properties  of  a  triangle,  the  knowledge 
of  the  working  of  a  machine,  or  a  demonstration  in  anatomy, 
or  fact  of  history.  The  sphere  of  the  intellect  is  to  tell  us 
what  is  true;  that  of  the  conscience  is  to  inform  us  what  is 
right, — the  one  is  confined  to  knowledge,  the  other  to  moral 
obligation.  The  intellect  instructs  us  what  to  do,  the  con- 
science how  to  do.  Truth  is  the  end  of  the  one,  duty  of  the 
other;  nor  can  any  sophistry  confound  knowledge  and  duty. 
The  reasoning  is  one  thing,  the  feeling  of  obligation  is  another. 
While  the  intellect  is  so  distinct  from  the  conscience,  it  yet 
sustains  to  it  a  most  intimate  relation.  If  the  reasoning 
power  originates  perceptions  or  new  intellectual  views,  and 
the  conscience  moral  emotions  or  feelings  of  obligation,  vet 
it  is  greatly  aided  and  supported  by  the  various  powers  of 
perception  and  comparison ;  consequently  the  decisions  of 
conscience  must  be  according  to  the  knowledge  possessed  or 
the  light  enjoyed.  The  same  outward  acts  may  have  de- 
cisions altogether  different  from  the  different  motives  that 
may  be  known  to  influence  the  conduct.  What  the  eon- 
science  looks  at  is  the  ^disposition  of  the  mind, — the  actual 
state  of  the  heart  that  leads  to  overt  action.  Consequently 
its  decisions  must  vary  with  the  diverse  degrees  of  knowl- 
edge, and  be  clear  or  obscure,  weak  or  strong,  just  in  pro- 
portion to  the  facilities  possessed  of  attaining  a  correct 
knowledge. 

"Probably  everyone,"  says  Professor  Upham,  "can  say 


144  THE  EQUITY  AND 

with  confidence  that  he  is  conscious  of  a  cliiFerence  in  the 
moral  emotions  of  approval  and  disapproval,  and  the  mere 
intellectual  perceptions  of  agreement  and  disagreement 
which  are  characteristic  of  reasoning.  In  the  view  of  con- 
sciousness there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  are  regarded  as 
entirely  diverse  in  their  nature,  and  as  utterly  incapable  of 
being  interchanged  or  identified  with  each  other.  The 
moral  feeling  is  one  thing,  and  the  intellectual  perception  or 
suggestion  involved,  both  in  the  processes  and  the  result  of 
reasoning,  is  another.  Although  the  reasoning  power  and 
the  conscience,  or  the  moral  being,  are  thus  distinct  from 
each  other  in  their  nature,  they  are  clearly  connected  in  their 
relations,  as  has  been  intimated  already,  inasmuch  as  the 
intellect,  particularly  the  ratiocinative  or  deductive  part  of  it, 
is  the  formation  or  basis  of  moral  action.  "We  must  know  a 
thing,  it  must  first  be  an  object  of  perception,  before  we 
can  take  any  moral  cognizance  of  it ;  and  this  is  not  all, — the 
moral  cognizance,  as  we  have  already  had  occasion  to  ex- 
plain, will  conform  itself  with  great  precision  to  the  intel- 
lectual cognizance — that  is  to  say,  it  will  take  new  ground 
in  its  decisions  in'  conformity  with  new  facts  perceived.  Con- 
sequently we  cannot  rel}- perfectly  on  a  moral  decision  which 
is  founded  on  a  premature  or  imperfect  knowledge.  The 
more  carefully  and  judiciously  we  reason  upon  a  subject,  the 
more  thoroughly  we  understand  it  in  itself  and  its  relations, 
the  more  confidently  may  we  receive  the  estimate  which  the 
voice  of  conscience  makes  of  its  moral  character." 

Thus,  in  contemplating  the  relation  the  intellect  sustains 
to  the  conscience,  we  find  that  conscience  makes  the  intellect 
to  assist  it  as  an  instrument  in  its  decisions.  The  intellect 
acts  the  part  of  an  indispensable  servant  that  never  can  be 
spared  in  the  performance  of  its  functions.  The  supremacy 
of  conscience  is  seen,  in  that  it  makes  tributary  to  it  the  in- 
tellect and  the  will,  and  exercises  a  universal  sway  over  all 
the  voluntary  states  of  the  mind. 

"There  is  a  superior  principle  of  reflection  or  conscience 
in  every  man,"  says  Butler,  "  which  distinguishes  between 
the  internal  principles  of  the  heart,  as  well  as  his  external  ac- 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  145 

tions,  which  passes  judgment  upon  himself,  and  upon  them 
pronounces  deterrainatelj  some  actions  to  be  in  themselves 
just,  right,  good,  others  to  be  in  themselves  evil,  wrong,  un- 
just, which  without  being  advised  with,  magisterially  exists 
itself,  and  disapproves  or  condemns  him  the  doer  of  them  ac- 
cordingly, and  which,  if  not  forcibly  stopped,  naturally  and 
always  of  course  goes  on  to  anticipate  a  higher  and  more 
effectual  sentence,  which  shall  second  and  affirm  its  own." 

Let  us  then  consider  conscience  in  its  universality  as  a  law, 
in  its  energy  as  a  feeling,  and  in  its  greatness  as  a  judge. 
In  considering  conscience  as  a  law,  we  are  to  remember  that, 
as  a  rule  of  divine  origin,  it  is  implanted  as  a  first  principle 
in  the  moral  constitution  by  God  himself.  It  is,  therefore, 
that  upon  which  the  mind  proceeds;  that  which  directs  the 
reason  and  the  judgment;  that  by  which  all  that  is  praise- 
worthy or  is  blamable  is  estimated.  Consequently  as  a  law 
it  is  universal,  and  from  which  proceed  our  first  lessons  of 
right  and  wrong.  Thus,  in  the  words  of  Adam  Smith,  we 
saj^,  "upon  whatever  we  suppose  that  our  moral  faculties  are 
founded,  whether  upon  a  certain  modification  of  reason,  upon 
an  original  instinct  called  moral  sense,  or  on  some  other  prin- 
ciple of  our  nature,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  they  are  given 
us  for  the  direction  of  our  conduct  in  this  life."  So  impressed 
even  were  the  ancients  who  had  not  the  light  of  Revelation 
to  guide,  with  conscience  as  a  rule,  that  Cicero  in  a  well- 
known  passage  says:  "  Right  reason  is  itself  a  law  congenial 
to  the  feelings  of  nature,  uniform,  eternal,  calling  imperiously 
to  our  duty,  and  peremptorily  prohibiting  every  violation  of 
it."  "  Wor  does  it  speak  one  language  at  Rome  and  another 
at  Athens,  varying  from  place  to  place,  or  from  time  to  time  ; 
but  it  addresses  itself  to  all  nations  and  to  all  ages,  deriving 
its  authorit}'  from  the  common  sovereign  of  the  universe,  and 
carrying  home  its  sanctions  to  every  heart  by  the  inevitable 
punishment  which  it  inflicts  on  transgressors." 

But  we  have  a  far  higher  authoritj*  for  conscience  as  a  law 
in  the  words  of  inspiration,  for  we  read,  "they  who  have  no 
law  (that  is,  no  written  law)  are  a  law  unto  themselves,  which 
shows  the  law  written  in  their  hearts."     Thus,  we  see  how 

10 


146  THE  EQUITY  AND 

clearly  defined  is  that  faculty  that  makes  us  moral  agents: 
our  responsibility  rests  upon  the  fact,  not  only  that  God  has 
given  us  a  law  revealed  upon  the  pages  of  the  Bible,  but  a 
law  revealed  upon  the  pages  of  the  heart,  enstamped  with  a 
Divine  hand  upon  the  very  tablet  of  the  soul.  Thus  we  see 
that  however  defaced  may  be  the  impression  of  that  law  ; 
however  perverted  may  be  our  moral  sense ;  however  unsafe 
by  our  sins  we  may  make  the  conscience  as  a  sole  guide ; 
yet  still  that  law  remains,  still  in  legible  characters  is  it 
written  upon  the  soul ;  still,  whether  by  our  sins  we  make 
our  conscience  unenlightened,  or  unfaithful,  or  troubled,  or 
hardened,  that  law,  written  in  the  heart,  bears  witness,  and, 
amid  its  greatest  perversions,  is  alike  universal  in  its  sanc- 
tions, and  condemning  in  its  abuse.  Consequently  we  see 
the  excellence  of  the  moral  nature  as  given  to  us  by  God, 
we  see  how  noble,  originally,  is  that  constitution  not  depend- 
ent for  its  principle  of  duty  upon  the  ever-varying  outward 
relations  of  life.  Here,  within,  does  every  man  have  a  con- 
science which,  if  he  has  no  higher  revelation,  is  a  law  to  him- 
self, a  rule  of  duty  in  life  bearing  witness  to  his  conduct,  and 
which,  however  perverted,  will  not  make  those  in  the  deep- 
est darkness  of  heathenism  excusable  for  their  sins, — a  law 
springing  from  no  human  source,  but  coming  direct  from 
our  Maker. 

Consider  then  conscience  in  its  energy  as  a  feeling.  Con- 
science has  to  do  not  only  with  the  reason,  it  is  not  only  that 
which  directs  the  mind,  giving  to  it  uniformity  in  its  deci- 
sions, and  making  itself  a  rule  of  conduct  universal  as  man. 
But  conscience  has  also  its  seat  in  the  emotional  part  of  our 
nature.  It  is  enthroned  in  the  sfinsibilities,  and  thus  has  to 
do  with  every  class  of  our  affections.  It  is  this  sphere  of 
conscience  that  gives  to  it  an  energy  so  great.  Observe  how 
soon  conscience  shows  itself  as  supreme  over  the  feelings. 
The  words,  "You  ought  to  do  so !"  "I  cannot  bear  to  think 
of  it !"  or  "  I  am  pleased  that  I  obey  my  father  or  mother !" 
"  I  am  glad  I  did  not  hurt  my  brother,  or  sister,  or  school- 
mate !"  are  the  first  exclamations  of  childhood  and  youth: 
they  come  unbidden  from  the  heart;   they  are  the  earliest 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  147 

words  of  our  youngest  years.  But  with  the  increase  of  age 
conscience  displays  also  a  mighty  energy.  By  our  perver- 
sions of  duty  we  may  have  smothered  its  voice,  or  silenced 
the  alarm-bell  in  our  hearts,  and  jQt  we  cannot,  by  our  wills 
alone,  control  it;  we  cannot  say.  Thus  far  shall  conscience  go 
in  its  reproaches  and  no  farther.  No  human  wisdom  or  might 
is  able  to  extinguish  in  the  heart  its  reproaches.  It  comes 
often  to  the  mind  like  a  thief  in  the  night.  It  comes  after 
the  drunken  scene  of  midnight  revelry  to  the  miserable  suf- 
ferer, and  adds  a  hundred  reproaches  to  every  pain  that 
lacerates  the  body.  It  comes  at  times  to  the  gay  pleasure- 
seeker,  and  spoils  all  the  merriment  of  the  hour  by  its  in- 
ward stings.  It  comes  to  the  oppressor  of  the  poor  and 
helpless,  and  makes  the  heart  to  ache  with  its  stern  rebukes. 
Upon  the  palace  walls  of  godless  wealth  it  writes,  with  an 
invisible  hand,  the  dread  epitaph  of  its  ruin. 

But  the  energy  of  conscience  upon  the  sensibilities  is  seen 
peculiarly  in  cases  of  great  crime.  "What  but  conscience  in 
its  reproaches  is  present  to  the  murderer  when  he  seeks  to 
drown  the  remembrance  of  his  sin  in  the  intoxicating  cup  ! 
What  but  conscience  is  present  to  him  whom  remorse  for 
some  deep  wrong  drives  to  the  madness  of  suicide  !  Some- 
times the  sea  is  troubled  with  angry  waves,  and  the  waters 
dash  their  white  spray  upon  the  rocks;  sometimes  the  sk}^  is 
dark  with  clouds,  and  the  tempest-wind  utters  its  dismal  cvy  ; 
sometimes  the  rumbling  thunder  is  heard,  and  the  lightning 
flashes  its  lurid  light  across  the  darkness.  But  these  indica- 
tions of  the  strife  of  nature  but  faintly  represent  the  higher 
strife  that  rages  in  the  heart  when  conscience  moves  over  the 
sea  of  human  sensibility.  There  are  times  when  conscience 
awakes  to  a  more  terrific  energy,  and  flashes  upon  the  soul 
with  a  more  scorching  light.  There  are  times  when  the  roar 
of  the  troubled  waters  is  more  fearful,  and  there  gathers  upon 
the  sky  a  deeper  darkness.  The  emotional  part  of  our  nature 
possesses  in  itself  innumerable  diversities  of  feeling.  There  is 
joy  and  sorrow  and  fear  and  hate  and  love;  and  yet  each  one 
of  these  master  passions  comes  with  an  endless  retinue  of  at- 
tendant sensibilities.     We  may  as  well  attempt  to  count  the 


148  THE  EQUirr  AND 

number  of  the  stars  as  that  throng  of  emotions  that  pervade 
the  souL  ISTow  over  these  feelings  conscience  exercises  an  un- 
limited swa}':  her  very  throne  is  in  the  heart  of  human  sen- 
sibility.    Here  is  it  that  she  acknowledges  no  superior. 

Having  contemplated  conscience  in  the  painful  emotions 
engendered  bj-  wrong  conduct,  let  us  look  to  conscience  in 
the  feelings  of  pleasure  created  by  right  conduct.  Consider 
that  God  has  implanted  in  man  a  conscience  to  be  independ- 
ent of  all  outward  circumstances,  a  rewarder  of  virtue.  He 
has  given  a  conscience  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  man  into 
a  state  of  peace  and  joy  far  superior  to  every  external  con- 
dition of  hap})iness.  Thus,  if  conscience  by  its  iniluence 
over  the  sensibilities  possesses  in  itself  the  elements  of  the 
liighest  wretchedness,  it  also  has  the  secret  of  the  noblest 
happiness.  "Who  can  describe  the  charm  of  its  approval  of 
some  virtuous  deed  ?  Who  delineate  the  peace  that  it  creates 
when  its  intimations  of  right  are  obeyed?  Thus  have  we 
looked  upon  nature  when  the  setting  sun  threw  its  light  upon 
some  landscape  of  surpassing  beauty, — with  tints  of  a  thou- 
sand colors  sky  and  water  were  reflected  :  the  summer  breeze 
wafted  the  sweet  perfume  of  flowers,  and  gently  did  the 
Avarbling  of  the  bird  die  upon  the  ear.  Here  was  nature's 
harmony,  and  her  mighty  energies  for  evil  controlled  by  a 
law  that  subserved  the  richest  pleasure  and  the  noblest  peace. 
Thus  with  conscience  when  at  peace  with  itself,  over  man's 
nature  in  right  conduct  she  exercises  a  nobler  harmony  than 
is  seen  in  the  external  world.  In  the  influence  of  the  con- 
science upon  the  sensibilities  in  right  conduct,  we  see  the 
great  reason  of  the  happiness  that  virtue  brings  with  it.  The 
conscience  in  our  nature  is  like  a  mirror:  it  reflects  every- 
thing that  passes  over  it.  Let  the  conduct  be  wa'ong,  and  it 
reflects  the  moral  deformity  of  the  person  himself.  Let  the 
conduct  be  right,  and  the  moral  beauty  of  that  virtue  is  with 
equal  faithfulness  reflected.  Thus  the  heart  has  within  itself 
a  mirror  upon  which,  in  vivid  distinctness,  is  delineated  every 
feature  of  our  moral  nature. 

But  there  is  another  element  in  conscience  having  its  seat 
in  the  aflfections.     That  element  consists  in  the  mvsterious 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  149 

power  possessed  by  conscience  to  throw  all  the  sensibilities 
by  sin  into  confusion,  or  unite  them  by  virtue  into  harmony. 
The  sweeter  the  music  of  a  harp,  the  more  painful  the  dis- 
cord wdien  broken.  The  conscience  of  a  good  man  is  like 
sweet  music,  and  every  sensibility  of  the  nature  is  made  to 
give  out  a  note  of  harmony ;  while  the  sensibilities  of  a  bad 
man  by  conscience  are  rudely  jostled  together,  and  every 
movement  is  that  of  discord.  Thus  is  it  that  in  wrong  con- 
duct conscience  creates  so  great  uneasiness  in  the  sensibili- 
ties Conscience  rudely  throws  them  into  collision, — the 
passions  are  moved  out  of  their  appropriate  sphere,  and  made 
to  conflict  with  each  other.  Thus  we  see  the  meaning  of 
the  language,  "  The  wicked  are  like  the  troubled  sea  that 
cannot  rest."  Conscience  will  not  let  the  sensibilities  rest, 
it  makes  its  sharp  note  of  discord  to  vibrate  with  rude  vio- 
lence through  the  emotions,  stirring  them  all  up  like  a  hive 
of  bees  broken  in  upon, — making  war  in  every  member,  and 
bringing  into  hot  pursuit  every  liend  of  mischief.  It  is  in 
the  sensibilities  that  its  energy  is  peculiarly  displayed. 

But  conscience  exerts  over  the  sensibilities  its  highest  in- 
fluence through  the  law  of  association.  We  must  under- 
stand that  law  in  order  to  see,  in  the  strongest  light,  the 
energy  of  conscience  upon  the  emotions.  Consider  then  the 
thoughts  that  are  made  to  rise  up  in  the  mind  through  the 
influence  of  association.  By  this  law  past  thoughts  and  deeds, 
through  the  medium  of  some  strikino^  incident  or  resem- 
bhince,  are  presented  to  the  mind.  Thus,  let  a  person,  after 
3'ears  of  absence,  revisit  the  scenes  of  his  childhood,  and  the 
familiar  events  of  his  early  years  will  be  brought  to  mind  by 
the  house  in  wdiich  he  once  lived,  by  the  fields  where  once 
he  roamed,  by  the  running  stream  where  once  he  played. 
Should  his  eye  light  upon  the  portrait  of  a  brother,  or  sister, 
or  mother,  or  father,  or  some  aged  relative  long  ago  dead, 
the  principle  of  association  within  will  recall  to  mind  things 
that  had  been  before  buried  in  forgetful n ess.  The  actions 
of  his  past  life  \\\\\  come  up  before  him  in  vivid  distinctness. 
iSTow  conscience  makes  use  of  the  principle  of  association  to 
impress  its  lessons  most  effectually  upon  the  mind.  It  throws 


150  THE  EQUITY  AND 

a  clear  light  upon  the  characters  of  our  past  history.  Thus 
we  see  how  the  man  of  atrocious  crime  shuns  the  spot  that 
once  witnessed  his  sin.  Thus  we  see  how  deeds  of  benevo- 
lence, and  great  self-sacrifice  for  the  good  of  others,  throw 
a  spell  of  beauty  over  the  local  habitation  that  bore  testi- 
mony to  our  virtue. 

It  would  seem  as  if  conscience  had  in  it  the  highest  ele- 
ments of  our  happiness  or  our  misery.  If  this  were  not  so, 
why  the  eifort  to  harden  it,  or  make  it  turn  traitor  to  our 
welfare?  The  wicked  man  never  works  so  hard  as  when  he 
seeks  to  drown  the  reproaches  of  conscience,  or  make  it  give 
an  erroneous  decision.  Before  we  commit  a  great  sin,  we  seek 
by  our  sophistry  to  silence  conscience,  or  compel  it  to  give  a 
perverted  acquiescence. 

The  most  horrid  tragedies  of  the  French  Revolution  were 
dignified  under  the  abused  name  of  law  and  ecpial  rights. 
The  worst  excesses  of  despotism  are  justified  by  appealing 
to  the  necessity  of  preserving  order.  "  Whom  we  hate  we 
defame,"  is  an  adage  as  old  as  the  world.  It  would  appear 
as  if  the  commission  of  wrong  was  more  than  half  disrobed 
of  its  hateful ness  to  the  mind,  when  the  mantle  of  a  per- 
verted conscience  had  been  thrown  over  it.  How  expressive 
the  words,  "But  even  their  mind  and  conscience  is  defiled!" 
Thus  do  we  see  the  heathen  casting  her  infant  into  the  Gan- 
ges, or  throwing  herself  into  the  flame  that  consumes  her 
dead  husband.  Thus  do  we  read  of  Ravaillac  glorying  in  his 
crime,  while  a  nation  mourns  over  a  murdered  king.  Thus 
do  we  hear  of  the  stoic  firmness  of  a  Guy  Fawkes,  who  was 
arrested  before  he  had  succeeded  in  blowing  up  with  powder 
the  Parliament  and  royal  family  of  England.  Nor  is  it  only 
in  great  sins  that  we  see  the  eiFort  made,  and  often  with  suc- 
cess, in  compelling  conscience  to  a  false  decision.  Tlie  every- 
day events  of  life  show  how  careful  men  are  to  silence  its 
reproaches,  or  justify  by  it  their  sins. 

Let  us  then  consider  conscience  as  a  judge.  We  do  but 
half  realize  the  power  of  conscience,  unless  we  consider  that 
in  a  good  degree  it  possesses  the  attributes  of  a  judge.  We 
have  viewed  conscience  in  its  universality  as  a  law,  and  in 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  151 

its  energy  as  a  feeling,  but  when  we  come  to  view  it  in  its 
judicial  decisions  we  see  most  clearly  what  is  comprehended 
in  the  ^v'ord  judgment.  The  fact  that  now  by  our  sins  we  have 
made  our  conscience  blind,  or  hard,  or  in  any  way  perverted 
it,  in  no  respect  authorizes  the  conclusion  that  always  it  will 
slumber,  or  never  be  in  a  different  state.  It  is  a  faculty  of 
the  mind  restricted  in  its  exercise  by  the  present  knowledge 
possessed,  and  dependent  in  its  decisions  upon  the  amount 
of  light  enjoyed,  and  the  circumstances  under  which  it  is 
called  upon  to  utter  its  voice.  Thus  we  see  why  the  consciences 
of  different  persons  are  so  varied,  and  why  different  decisions 
are  made  even  upon  the  same  acts.  There  are  two  states  that 
give  diversity  to  the  decisions  of  conscience:  the  circum- 
stances without  us,  and  those  within  us, — our  external  and 
internal  condition.  Everything  to  the  eye  looks  differently 
upon  a  mountain  to  what  it  does  in  a  valley,  and  yet  the  per- 
ception to  the  QyQ  may  be  in  its  sphere  as  true  in  one  condi- 
tion as  in  another.  The  inference  then  that  change  of  cir- 
cumstances, internal  or  external,  or  both,  will  have  a  mighty 
influence  in  the  decisions  of  conscience,  is  most  clear.  Who 
knows  not  the  fact  that  there  are  hours  when  long-buried 
sins  come,  through  the  law  of  association,  before  the  mind 
like  on  army  of  giants!  It  was  conscience  that  spoiled  all 
the  pleasures  of  Belshazzar's  feast,  and  made  the  knees  of  the 
guilty  monarch  shake  at  the  handwriting  upon  the  wall.  It 
was  conscience  that  made  Felix  tremble  as  Paul  reasoned  to 
him  of  righteousness,  temperance,  and  a  judgment  to  come. 
But  the  greatness  of  conscience  as  a  judge  will  be  mani- 
fest in  its  highest  power  when  there  comes  a  revolution  in 
the  circumstances  of  our  existence.  It  is  especially  when 
there  passes  over  our  being  that  mighty  change  that  trans 
fers  us  from  this  world  to  another;  then  conscience  will,  in 
its  new  state  of  being,  possess  in  its  judicial  decisions  a  far 
greater  energy  of  action.  Think  for  a  moment  of  the  ten 
thousand  circumstances  of  this  world  that  combine  to  silence 
or  pervert  the  decisions  of  conscience.  As  Delilah  bound 
round  the  sleeping  Samson  new  ropes,  she  dreamed  not  that 
when  awake,  the  strong  man,  at  the  cry  of  the  Philistines, 


152  THE  EQUITY  AND 

would  break  them  as  flax  before  the  tire.  So  also  we  reason 
of  our  conscience,  that  sleeping  Samson  in  this  world. 
But  when  the  great  trump  of  the  last  daj^  is  heard, — when 
resounding  through  the  heavens  there  enters  the  cold  grave 
the  voice  of  God,  "Awake  ye  dead,  and  come  to  judgment!" 
conscience  then  no  longer  will  be  bound  with  the  ropes  of 
Delihih.  Coming  forth  trora  the  closed  chambers  where  fee- 
bly her  voice  was  heard  amid  the  confused  clamor  of  human 
passion  in  this  life,  conscience  then  will  assume  the  preroga- 
tives of  a  judge  that  will  not  be  silenced  in  the  discharge  of 
duty.  The  verdict  of  Christ  our  judge  will  meet  with  a  re- 
sponse in  every  heart.  To  the  conscience  itself  will  the 
appeal  of  equity  be  made,  and  true  to  its  high  source,  true 
to  its  nature,  true  to  the  noblest  privilege  of  its  being,  will 
conscience  utter  forth  a  decision  that  shall  be  as  irreversible 
as  the  soul  in  its  nature  is  immortal. 

When  we  are  asked  why  is  virtue  virtue,  it  may  be  very 
well  to  say  because  virtue  is  useful,  because  it  accords  with 
the  litness  of  things,  it  is  in  harmon}'  \v\i\\  all  moral  law,  is 
spiritual  beauty  and  divine  order.  But  all  these  things  are 
the  fruits  of  virtue,  the  necessary  attendants  upon  virtue,  not 
the  tree  itself.  It  is  only  when  we  say  virtue  is  virtue,  be- 
cause it  is  right,  that  we  may  be  said  to  reach  that  wall  of  ada- 
mant beyond  which  all  inquiry  must  stop.  When  the  inter- 
rogation is  put,  why  is  virtue  useful,  or  why  does  it  accord 
with  the  fitness  of  things,  or  harmonize  w^ith  divine  law  and 
order,  or  promote  our  noblest  happiness  ? — what  other  so- 
lution to  this  question  can  be  given  than  that  virtue  is  some- 
thing in  itself  intrinsically  right,  and  is  thus  right,  because 
conscience,  our  moral  nature,  ever  commands  us  when  seen 
to  love  it;  because  the  feeling  of  obligation,  universal  as  man,  at 
once  springs  up  in  the  heart;  because  conscience,  long  before 
the  intellect  can  weigh  the  fruits  of  virtue,  or  calculate  its 
consequences,  instinctively  tells  us  to  love  it  and  hate  its 
opposite ;  because  imperatively  as  the  voice  of  God  con- 
science demands  that  we  should  esteem,  cherish,  and  fol- 
low virtue,  be  the  consequences  what  they  may;  because 
conscience  accuses  us  of  wrong,  where  virtue  is  hated,  and 


BENEVOLEyCE   OF  GOB.  I53 

selfishness  loved,  be  tlie  advantages  believed  in  ever  so 
great  ? 

But  are  we  conscious  bow  directly  we  attain  unto  the  evi- 
dence of  the  equity  and  benevolence  of  God,  when,  in  our  ex- 
amination of  conscience,  we  find  that  it  accords  as  a  divine  rule 
of  action  implanted  in  man  with  the  essential  element  of  all 
virtue?  Do  we  suitably  apprehend  how  much  is  included  in 
the  simple  fact  that  conscience  tells  us  to  do  what  is  right, 
approves  of  it  when  seen,  and  uniformly,  when  used  as  God 
meant  it  should  be  used,  condemns  us  for  wrong-doing?  Is 
it  not  evident  that  such  a  faculty  shows  the  essential  virtue 
of  God  and  tells  us  that  the  great  author  of  the  conscience 
loves  that  which  is  right,  and  hates  that  which  is  wrong ; 
that  he  does  so  from  his  very  nature  before  he  made  man, 
before  he  revealed  his  law,  and  from  eternity  when  man  or 
angel  had  no  existence  ?  Can  any  absurdity  be  so  great  as 
that  which  supposes  that  God's  moral  law  should  not  be  the 
transcript  of  his  own  equity  and  benevolence?  Is  it  possible 
that  the  universal  law  of  God,  based  upon  the  immutable  dis- 
tinction of  right  and  wrong,  should  belie  his  own  nature  <?  It 
is  one  thing  to  consider  conscience  in  its  willful  perversion, 
or  in  that  abuse  created  by  a  depraved  will  and  heart,  but 
quite  a  different  matter  to  view  it  simply  as  an  original  faculty 
in  its  legitimate  exercise. 

"We  believe  that  conscience  in  the  fall  of  man,  and  in  the 
subsequent  development  of  depravity  in  the  human  race, 
sufiered  with  the  rest  of  our  nature;  but  conscience,  even  in 
its  greatest  ruin,  shows  as  conclusivelj-  its  origin  from  God 
as  the  intellect  or  the  body.  And  the  reason  why  especially 
the  conscience  is  deserving  of  careful  study,  is  that  while  the 
natural  attributes  of  God  are  shown  in  the  creation  of  this 
world  and  its  inhabitants,  there  is  a  peculiar  light  thrown 
upon  the  moral  attributes  of  God  in  everything  relating  to 
ihe  moral  nature  of  man.  We  distinguish  between  the  moral 
image  of  God  as  reflected  from  an  unperverted  conscience, 
and  conscience  abused  ;  but  we  must  not  shut  our  eyes  to  the 
great  fact  that  God's  equity,  benevolence,  and  wisdom  are  seen 
even  in  the  conscience,  however  debased.     By  a  wrong  con- 


154  THE  EQUITY  AND 

ditioii  of  circumstances  the  needle  of  the  compass  may  point 
wrong;  but  who  is  disposed  to  question  the  wisdom  and  be- 
nevolence of  the  compass  in  itself  considered?  Just  so  of 
the  conscience;  we  must  view  it  as  given  to  man  for  the  no- 
blest and  most  benevolent  end. 

Looking  at  it  simply  as  an  original  faculty,  we  are  irre- 
sistibly driven  to  the  inference  that  as  the  appropriate  office 
of  conscience  is  to  approve  of  right  and  condemn  for  wrong, 
as  duty  is  its  exclusive  sphere,  and  the  very  end  for  which  it 
was  given,  so  also  duty,  eternal  right,  constitutes  the  essen- 
tial glory  of  the  nature  of  God.  No  supposition  can  be  more 
foolish  and  wicked  than  that  God's  work,  as  it  comes  from 
his  liauds,  will  throw  falsehood  upon  his  own  nature,  and  re- 
pudiate in  its  right  action  the  very  author  of  its  being. 

When  we  consider  the  happiness  that  arises  from  the  exer- 
cise of  the  bodily  organs,  the  useful  end  secured  by  the 
muscles  of  the  human  frame,  the  benevolence  evinced  in  the 
animal  creation,  and  the  adaptation  of  nature  to  the  varied 
offices  of  all  creatures,  we  are  indeed  impressed  with  the 
goodness  of  God.  But  it  is  especially  when  man  is  viewed 
as  having  a  conscience  which  is  the  great  instrument  by  which 
all  moral  obligation  is  seen  and  felt,  whose  sphere  of  action 
is  internal  and  limited  to  the  merit  and  demerit  of  moral 
character,  that  we  must  arrive  to  the  conclusion  that  such  an 
instrument  must  come  from  a  being  who  supremely  loves  the 
right  and  hates  the  wrong,  and  is  himself  essentially  and  eter- 
nally good. 

"Duty,"  says  Francis  Bowen,  "is  not  caused,  for  it  never 
began  to  be  ;  it  has  existed  from  eternity.  We  cannot  even 
conceive  of  a  period  when  justice  was  not,  or  will  not  be 
obligatory  upon  every  being  capable  of  understanding  what 
justice  requires:  upon  the  idea  or  feeling  expressed  by  the 
word  ought,  the  whole  science  of  morals  depends.  It  diliers 
not  in  degree,  but  in  kind,  from  desire  and  appetite,  so  that 
these  can  never  really  come  into  competition  with  it.  In 
truth  it  does  not  admit  of  degrees,  for  there  are  no  half-way 
obligations.  Conscience  either  speaks  absolutely,  or  not 
at  all." 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  155 

Havinoj  thus  considered  the  o-reat  element  of  virtue  as  con- 
sisting  in  the  idea  of  right  or  duty,  and  that  this  alone  is  the 
exclusive  sphere  of  conscience  as  the  nohlest  facult}'  of  man, 
is  it  not  evident  that  conscience  in  its  nature  reveals  the  es- 
sential justice  and  henevolence  of  God?  Does  it  not  as  a 
rule  of  conduct  manifest  the  actual  disposition  of  the  Deity 
himself?  Must  we  not  infer  that  the  great  idea  of  right,  of 
moral  obligation,  or  the  feeling  comprehended  in  the  word 
ought.,  had  its  origin  from  God  ?  Is  it  not  evident,  from  the 
consideration  of  the  moral  constitution  of  man,  that  God 
loves  that  which  is  in  its  nature  good  and  hates  that  which 
is  evil ;  that  he  always  approves  of  the  right,  and  condemns 
for  the  wrong?  God  thus  acts,  not  so  much  because  he  has 
made  a  law,  as  because  his  own  iniiuite  nature  leads  him  to 
love  the  right  and  hate  the  wrong. 

It  is  a  great  step  that  we  take  to  prove  the  equity  and  be- 
nevolence of  God,  when  we  show  that  there  is  something  in 
virtue  intrinsically  good,  and  in  its  opposite  inherently  evil, 
and  that  conscience,  as  an  original  faculty,  enjoins  in  its 
proper  use  the  same  love  of  virtue  or  right  that  reigns  in  the 
heart  of  God.  Thus  far  the  consideration  of  virtue  as  it 
comes  before  the  intellect  has  been  overlooked,  and  the  atten- 
tion confined  to  the  relation  that  virtue  sustains  to  the  con- 
science; but  we  must  not  confound  the  conscience  with  the 
intellect  or  the  affections.  It  is  essentially  different  from  both, 
however  intimately  the  conscience  may  be  associated  with 
the  intellect  and  affections;  it  is  evidently  designed  by  God 
to  be  an  absolute  rule,  and  exercise  a  supreme  control  over 
the  whole  moral  nature.  It  calls  upon  the  will  to  obey  its 
voice,  upon  the  intellect  to  give  to  it  information,  and  upon 
the  affections  to  love  its  beauty  and  urge  to  moral  action.  It 
imperatively  enjoins  submission  upon  all  the  faculties  of  our 
nature. 

But  the  conscience  is  vastly  strengthened  in  its  exercise  by 
a  written  law:  whatever  may  be  its  action  in  an  unperverted 
state,  it  is  essentially  dependent,  in  the  present  fallen  condi- 
tion of  man,  for  its  best  exercise,  upon  the  revealed  will  of 
God.     In  considering  the  chief  element  of  all  virtue,  it  has 


156  THE   EQUITY  AND 

been  seen  that  it  must  comprehend  that  which  is  addressed 
to  the  highest  part  of  our  nature.  If,  by  a  careful  analysis, 
we  distinguish  between  virtue  as  presented  to  the  intellect 
and  affections,  and  virtue  as  presented  to  the  conscience,  we 
shall  find  that  the  intellect  tells  us  what  is  true,  the  affections 
what  is  morally  fit  or  beautiful,  while  the  conscience  gives 
the  feeling  of  ought,  and  the  idea  of  right.  Can  we  then  dis- 
criminate between  the  common  quality  of  virtue  and  its  first 
element,  when  we  reach  that  wall  of  adamant  that  bounds 
all  further  inquiry  ?  Certainly  we  can,  by  simply  consider- 
ing virtue  as  it  presents  itself  to  the  intellect  and  affections, 
and  as  it  presents  itself  to  the  conscience. 

The  intellect,  as  a  perceiving  power,  tells  us  that  virtue 
upon  the  whole  is  useful,  that  it  promotes  the  highest  liappi- 
ness,  conforms  to  order,  and  harmonizes  with  all  moral  law. 
The  affections  assure  us  that  virtue  is  something  in  itself 
beautiful,  good,  lovely,  and  most  desirable  ;  but  the  conscience 
imperatively  tells  us  that  virtm  is  right  in  its  very  essence,  and 
awakens  the  feeling  of  moral  obligation.  Our  moral  con- 
stitution, with  the  threefold  power  of  the  intellect,  affections, 
and  conscience,  calls  for  the  exercise  of  virtue.  There  is 
then  a  twofold  quality  in  all  benevolence  or  goodness  com- 
mon to  all  virtue:  first — justice,  and  then  love.  The  justice 
in  benevolence  or  goodness  regulates  it,  the  love  inspires  it. 
God's  justice  makes  his  conduct  always  right,  his  love 
always  urges  him  to  right  conduct.  By  justice  the  divine 
benevolence  is  forever  upon  the  side  of  equity,  of  moral  or- 
der and  law,  and  by  love  always  upon  the  side  of  that  most 
useful,  most  happy  and  good.  The  one  reigns  supreme  in 
the  mind,  the  other  in  the  heart  of  God. 

With  great  appropriateness  McCosh  remarks,  "  All  deep 
and  earnest  inquirers  into  the  nature  of  virtue  have  got  at 
least  a  partial  view  of  the  complex  truth,  each  has  seen  it 
under  one  aspect,  and  has  gone  away  so  ravished  with  the 
sight  that  he  never  thought  of  going  round  the  object  and  in- 
quiring if  it  had  another  aspect  equally  lovely.  Hutcheson 
is  right  in  saying  that  in  all  virtue  there  is  benevolence,  and 
Edwards  has  given  his  theory  a  wider  expansion  in  affirming 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  157 

that  love  to  being  is  of  the  very  essence  of  virtuous  action. 
CLarke  too  enunciated  a  profound  truth  vrhen  he  said  that 
there  is  an  eternal  fitness  in  virtue,  for  there  is  such  a  fitness 
in  that  righteousness  which  regulates  benevolence.  Reid 
and  Stewart  and  Cousin  have  developed  the  mental  process 
by  which  this  eternal  fitness  is  discovered,  and  have  shown, 
too,  that  virtue  must  reside  in  the  will.  Each  has  seen  so 
much  of  the  truth,  to  use  an  image  of  Jouftroy,  each  has 
seen  one  side  of  the  pyramid,  and  has  written  beneath  it,  not 
as  he  ought,  this  is  one  side  of  the  pyramid,  but  this  is  the 
pyramid.  One  party  has  seen  the  love,  and  another  has  seen 
the  rio^hteonsness.  Hutcheson  observed  that  afifection  and 
feeling  were  essential  parts  of  all  virtue,  but  took  no  cogni- 
zance of  the  fixed  principles  by  which  they  must  be  regu- 
lated. Edwards,  in  a  profound  investigation,  discovered  that 
love  must  be  according  to  a  rule,  but  did  not  follow  out  his 
investigations  so  far  as  to  discover  the  fundamental  nature 
of  that  rule,  as  being  no  less  essential  a  part  of  that  moral- 
ity than  love  itself.  Clarke  and  Cudworth,  with  clear  intel- 
lectual intuition,  saw  the  presence  of  eternal  and  unresolv- 
able  principles.  Reid  and  his  followers  have  patiently 
investigated  the  powers  of  the  human  mind  by  which  these 
principles  are  discovered ;  but  none  of  these  latter  philoso- 
phers seem  to  give  its  proper  place  to  the  no  less  important 
element  of  benevolence.  The  true  theory  is  to  be  found,  not 
in  the  indiscriminate,  not  in  the  mere  mechanical  combina- 
tion of  the  two,  but  in  their  chemical  combination,  in  the 
melting  and  fusing  them  into  one." 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  how  the  ablest  writers  upon  the  na- 
ture of  virtue  have  differently  presented  the  subject.  But 
virtue  certainly  has  an  aspect  of  peculiar  value  when  contem- 
plated in  its  relation  to  the  conscience.  It  is  not  afiirmed 
that  the  whole  of  virtue,  in  the  widest  import  of  the  word, 
is  included  in  the  idea  of  right.  We  would  not,  to  use  the 
significant  image  of  Jouftroy,  make  out  the  pyramid  of  vir- 
tue all  over  to  be  only  that  which  is  presented  in  its  relation 
to  the  conscience.  But  there  must  be  something  upon  which 
the   great  fabric  of  virtue  should  stand;    and  what  is  that 


158  THE  EQUITY  AND 

foundation  unless  it  be  the  immutable  principle  of  right? 
Where  its  eternal  basis  unless  it  be  in  righteousness  ?  Where 
that  wall  of  adamant,  unless  it  be  in  the  feeling  of  o?/^; if,  the 
sentiment  of  right,  the  lirst  idea  that  lies  at  the  root  of  all 
moral  obligation  ?  If  the  conscience  is  higher  in  its  office 
than  the  intellect  or  the  atfections,  why  should  we  not  go  to 
the  noblest  part  of  our  nature  for  our  most  worthy  idea  of 
virtue?  Why,  in  viewing  the  separate  beauties  of  the  pyra- 
mid of  virtue,  should  we  overlook  the  everlasting  foundation 
of  rock  upon  which  it  stands  ? 

In  considering  the  moral  constitution  of  man  we  must  not 
overlook  two  elements  that  are  essential  to  the  existence  of 
that  constitution,  and  universally  admitted  by  it :  those  two 
elements  are  personality  aw^  freedom.  It  is  personality  that 
distinguishes  man  from  a  thing ;  it  is  freedom  that  gives  re- 
sponsibility. Remove  personality,  and  man  is  no  more  a 
moral  agent  than  a  stone;  remove  freedom,  and  man  can 
no  more  be  praised  or  blamed  for  his  conduct  than  the  wheel 
of  a  cotton- mill,  or  the  boiler  of  a  steamboat. 

But  where,  as  the  great  source  of  evidence,  do  we  look  for 
personality  and  freedom?  Is  it  not  to  the  consciousness? 
does  this  not  give  the  absolute  certainty  of  man  a  person, 
and  man  free  ?  Who  can  doubt  the  fact  that  he  thinks,  or 
feels ;  and  yet  do  thought  and  feeling  and  a  sense  of  moral 
obligation  find  their  foundation  in  the  perfect  certainty  that 
the  agent  thus  thinking,  feeling,  and  having  a  sense  of  right 
and  wrong,  is  a  person  and  free  ?  Can  any  process  of  reason 
ever  destroy  this  consciousness  universal  in  man  ?  Many  a 
philosopher  has  attempted  to  destroy  it,  and  have  thought 
to  merge  finite  personality  into  the  personality  of  God,  and 
finite  freedom  into  a  law,  or  mode  of  divine  existence,  and 
thus  have  landed  into  pantheism  ;  but  pantheism,  in  doing 
away  with  human  personality  and  freedom,  must  in  consist- 
ency do  away  with  all  right  or  wrong  in  man,  and  with  this  all 
true  accountability  either  to  God  or  to  man.  But  it  is  the 
peculiarity  of  consciousness  that  no  perversion  of  mind  can  do 
away  with  its  first  principles.  Some  may  reason  themselves 
into  the  idea  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  pleasure  or  pain, 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  159 

just  as  Berkeley  imagined  there  was  no  external  world;  but 
consciousness  will  not  belie  itself:  experience  is  a  school- 
master too  stubborn  to  be  fooled  with  senseless  argument. 

There  is  another  class  of  philosophers  who  are  found  in 
the  opposite  extreme;  they  ignore  altogether  the  existence 
of  God.  There  is  nothing  with  them  but  man  ;  man  is  God 
and  God  is  man.  Divine  personality  is  but  another  name  for 
human  personality,  and  the  freedom  of  the  Creator  is  all 
merged  into  the  liberty  of  the  creature.  But  here  man's 
consciousness  shows  the  atheist,  even  as  the  pantheist,  in 
error.  Man's  consciousness  is  intimately  associated  with  the 
idea  of  dependence,  and  this  feeling  of  dependence  shows 
itself  in  human  history  in  a  thousand  ways.  It  is  the  basis  of 
all  systems  of  sacrifices  to  propitiate  the  favor  of  a  higher 
power,  and  it  speaks  out  in  all  the  prayers,  all  the  worship, 
and  all  the  religion  of  man.  Why  so?  Simply  because  hu- 
man consciousness  tells  of  human  guilt,  and  groans  in  pain 
with  the  burden  of  sin.  But  what  is  sin  ?  What  is  guilt? 
Do  stones  pray  ?  Is  there  sorrow  in  trees  ?  Is  the  warbling  of 
the  bird,  or  the  roar  of  the  lion,  a  confession  of  guilt?  Do 
we  get  our  idea  of  churches  or  temples  of  worship,  Prot- 
estant or  Catholic,  Mohammedan  or  Pagan,  from  the  beasts 
of  the  field  ?     No  indeed  ! 

What  does  this  show  ?  Does  it  not  declare  the  great  fact 
of  moral  dependence  with  moral  responsibility, — freedom 
with  personality?  Is  not  human  consciousness  as  hostile  to 
the  atheist  as  to  the  pantheist?  Is  not  the  history  of  atheism 
and  pantheism  that  of  extremes  meeting,  and  both  belying 
each  other  ?  Both  start  from  one  common  point,  even  that 
of  denying  the  facts  of  consciousness :  but  the  facts  of  con- 
sciousness are  the  first  principles,  the  axioms  of  all  reason- 
ing, and  both  atheist  and  pantheist  show  their  senseless  folly 
by  repudiating  that  upon  which  all  reasoning  is  based.  But 
would  not  the  mathematician  show  himself  an  idiot  who 
should  formally  announce  that  he  should  demonstrate  the 
high  problems  of  geometry  without  admitting  as  first  steps 
the  axioms  of  geometry  ?  But  consciousness  has  its  axioms 
as  much  as  mathematics.     First  truths  do  not  admit  of  any 


160  THE  EQUITY  AND 

process  of  reason  ;  they  would  not  be  first  principles  or  truths 
if  they  were  reasoned  out ;  they  are  the  foundation  of  reason, 
and  reason  cannot  go  higher  than  its  source.  The  stream 
does  not  make  the  fountain,  but  the  fountain  the  stream. 
The  axiom  that  the  whole  is  greater  than  its  part  cannot 
admit  a  process  of  demonstration.  No  reason  can  make  an 
intuitive  certainty  any  plainer  The  facts  of  consciousness 
are  as  certain  and  universal  as  the  axioms  of  mathematics, 
but  they  are  equally  beyond  the  process  of  reason  :  reason, 
like  the  senses,  has  its  bounds;  within  its  sphere  it  can  lead 
to  certain  truth,  but  no  sooner  does  it  get  out  of  its  sphere 
than  it  shows  its  folly,  first  by  confusing  plain  truth,  and  then 
by  making  confusion  worse  confounded.  This  is  peculiarly 
so  when  reason  attempts  to  do  away  with  the  fi\cts  of  con- 
sciousness. It  is  the  insane  attempt  of  the  head,  and  hands, 
and  feet,  in  the  fable,  to  do  away  with  the  body ;  but  the 
body  destroyed,  and  the  head,  hands,  and  feet  must  perish 
too.  All  that  reason  gets  by  denying  the  facts  of  conscious- 
ness is  self-destruction.  If  the  foundation  of  all  reason  is 
taken  away,  reason  itself  must  fall  to  the  ground.  The  facts 
of  consciousness,  like  the  rock-bound  coast  of  England,  have 
for  ages  withstood  the  impetuous  waves  of  pantheism,  athe- 
ism, and  materialism,  and  for  ages  have  these  angry  billows 
been  beaten  back,  and  yet  while  human  depravity  lasts  will 
they  be  denied  or  explained  away;  but  no  infidelity  can  con- 
ceal these  facts:  they  will  project  out  like  this  rocky  coast, 
against  which  in  vain  dash  the  waves  of  the  sea. 

" Merely  literary  men,"  says  Wilson,  taking  the  thought 
from  Verplanck,  "are  slow  to  admit  that  vulgar  minds  can 
have  any  rational  perception  of  truths  involving  great  and 
hiffh  contemplation.  Thev  overlook  the  distinction  between 
the  nice  analysis  of  principles,  the  accurate  statement  of 
definitions,  logical  inferences,  and  the  solution  of  difliculties, 
and  the  structure  of  our  own  thoughts^  and  the  jilay  of  the  affec- 
tions. They  discern  not  between  the  theory  of  metaphysical 
science  and  the  first  truths  and  rational  instincts  which  are 
implanted  in  the  hearts  of  all,  and  which  prepare  them  to  see 
the  glory  of  the  Gospel,  to  feel  its  influence,  and  to  argue 
from  both  for  both  the  divinity  of  Christianity." 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  161 

The  instinctive  feelings  of  our  nature,  and  those  intuitive 
truths  upon  which  the  whole  science  of  reasoning  is  built, 
are  often  very  little  considered.  It  has  been  the  great  mis- 
take of  most  arguments  upon  the  existence  and  attributes  of 
God,  that  the  subtlety  of  metaphysics  has  been  resorted  to, 
rather  than  those  self-evident  truths  recognized  by  man  in 
all  ages.  The  evidence  for  a  God  of  infinite  goodness  and 
justice  is  addressed  to  us  through  two  mediums, — that  of  the 
senses  and  the  consciousness.  Important  as  may  be  the 
former,  and  necessary  to  satisfy  the  reason,  yet  the  latter,  in 
the  universality  of  its  power  and  influence,  far  surpasses  it. 
There  is  none  the  less  reality  in  the  truth  of  the  evidence  of 
consciousness  because  it  cannot  be  clothed  in  the  precise 
language  of  logic.  The  feeling  that  I  exist,  or  that  my  idea 
of  an  external  world  has  an  objective  reality,  are  truths  as 
certain  as  any  axiom  in  mathematics.  ITo  demonstration  to 
a  man  can  be  higher  than  self-demonstration.  Our  nature  is 
so  constructed  that  we  instinctively  believe  that  every  effect 
must  have  a  cause, — that  if  man  cannot  create  himself,  or  the 
world  create  itself,  or  the  laws  of  nature  adjust  themselves, 
then  we  must  look  for  a  cause  above  and  without  these 
things,  by  the  double  evidence  of  the  senses  and  the  con- 
sciousness. We  are  forced  to  believe  in  an  infinite  cause, 
self-existing,  underived  and  eternal, — the  author  of  man,  of 
nature,  and  its  laws. 

"When  we  study  the  conscience  we  find  it  to  be  a  great  law 
of  duty.  Within  the  heart  do  we  carry  about  a  witness 
for  the  goodness  of  God  that  no  sophistry  can  obliterate. 
We  must  believe  in  accordance  with  the  first  principles  of 
belief;  we  must  think  as  we  are  constituted;  our  nature  is 
outraged  if  we  do  not  thus  think.  We  are  upon  a  sea  of  end- 
less uncertaint}'  if  we  refuse  thus  to  believe.  We  are  forced 
to  admit,  that  even  if  conscience,  an  external  world,  ourselves 
were  chimeras,  if  by  any  possibility  they  could  be  mere 
fictions  of  imagination  ;  yet  we  must  act  and  think  and  have 
as  deep  a  conviction  of  the  reality  of  things  as  if  things  were 
real ;  and  however  far  we  might  venture  upon  the  sea  of  skep- 
ticism, yet  we  would  be  compelled  by  our  inherent  convic- 

11 


162  THE  EQUITY  AND 

tions  of  reality  to  return  back,  for  first  principles  cannot  be 
tortured  into  error  as  the  deductions  of  reason.  The  skeptic 
can  gain  nothing  by  disavowing  the  intuitive  convictions  of 
his  nature ;  he  does  not  better  himself  by  his  efforts  of  self- 
annihilation. 

"  There  is  a  spiritual  sun,"  saysFenelon,  "that  enlightens 
the  soul  more  fully  than  the  material  sun  does  the  body. 
This  sun  of  truth  leaves  no  shadow,  and  it  shines  upon  both 
hemispheres.  It  is  as  brilliant  in  the  night  as  in  the  day- 
time ;  it  is  not  without  that  it  sheds  its  rays,  it  dwells  within 
each  one  of  us, — one  man  cannot  hide  its  rays  from  another  ; 
whatever  corner  of  the  earth  we  may  go  to  there  it  is.  We 
never  need  say  to  another.  Stand  back  that  I  may  see  it ;  you 
hide  its  rays  from  me,  you  deprive  me  of  that  which  is  my 
due.  This  glorious  sun  never  sets;  no  clouds  intercept  its 
rays  but  those  formed  by  our  passions.  It  is  one  bright  day. 
It  sheds  light  upon  the  savage  in  the  darkest  caverns.  There 
are  no  eyes  so  weak  that  they  cannot  bear  its  light;  and 
there  is  no  man  so  blind  and  miserable  that  does  not  walk 
by  the  feeble  light  from  this  source  that  he  still  retains  in 
his  conscience." 

But  this  spiritual  sun  that  Fenelon  calls  the  conscience, 
carries  with  it  the  highest  evidence  of  the  goodness  of  God. 
By  teaching  us  that  duty  is  our  highest  end, — the  acting 
riirht  the  noblest  exercise  of  man,— it  reveals  as  truly  the  will 
of  God  to  us  as  if  that  will  was  written  upon  the  sky.  Why, 
if  God  was  not  good,  would  he  implant  a  principle  in  our 
nature  that  would  lead  us'  to  despise  wrong  and  injustice 
whenever  felt  and  seen  ?  Why  thus  instinctive  the  feelings 
that  rise  up  in  the  heart  of  approbation  of  right,  of  approval 
of  virtue,  of  esteem  for  the  lovely  and  excellent,  unless  the 
author  of  our  nature  himself  loved  the  right  and  the  good  ! 
Let  it  be  observed,  skepticism  cannot  so  confound  the  essen- 
tial nature  of  things  as  to  lead  us  to  deny  that  there  is  reality 
to  the  internal  ideas  of  right  and  wrong.  It  cannot  say 
virtue  and  vice  are  only  the  deceptive  creations  of  the  im- 
agination, as  all  the  reasoning  in  the  world  will  not  convince 
a  man  that  there  is  no  ocean  that  he  gazes  upon,  no  ground 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  163 

upon  which  he  walks,  no  sound  that  he  hears,  no  flower  that 
he  smells;  so  no  sophistry  can  blind  the  mind  to  the  inherent 
reality  of  right  and  wrong,  virtue  and  vice.  Our  knowledge 
of  these  distinctions  is  none  the  less  certain  because  it  is  in- 
tuitive or  self-evident.  First  truths  are  always  intuitions: 
no  explanation  can  make  clearer  to  us  the  idea  that  the 
whole  is  greater  than  a  part,  or  that  two  is  more  than  one; 
no  reasoning  can  make  clearer  to  us  the  idea  of  our  self- 
existence,  or  more  convincing  the  feeling  that  we  ought  to 
do  what  is  right,  and  avoid  what  is  wrong.  Who  but  a 
Being  who  loves  the  good  and  hates  the  bad  would  so  con- 
stitute the  heart  ?  "Would  God  give  in  the  soul  of  man  a 
spiritual  sun  to  reveal'  the  deformity  of  sin  and  the  beauty  of 
virtue,  if  that  sun  only  unveiled  that  which  would  awaken 
contempt  of  the  Deity  himself?  What  an  absurdity,  what 
wickedness  in  the  idea  that  the  author  of  our  moral  constitu- 
tion would  not  have  it  in  its  proper  exercise  the  reflection  of 
his  own  justice  and  goodness  ! 

"  The  great  Creator,"  says  Dr.  Alexander,  "  has  not  left 
himself  without  a  witness  in  the  heart  of  every  man.  It  is 
possible  that  a  man  may  be  so  abandoned  as  to  believe  in 
lies,  and  that  he  may  come  to  disbelieve  the  God  that  made 
and  supports  him.  But  he  cannot  obliterate  the  law  written 
in  his  heart ;  he  cannot  divest  himself  of  the  conviction  that 
certain  actions  are  morally  wrong ;  nor  can  he  prevent  the 
stings  of  remorse  when  he  commits  sins  of  an  enormous 
kind.  Men  may  indeed  spin  out  refined  metaphysical  theo- 
ries, and  come  to  the  conclusion  that  there  is  no  diflference 
between  virtue  and  vice,  and  that  these  distinctions  are  the 
result  of  education.  But  let  some  one  commit  a  flagrant  act 
of  injustice  towards  themselves,  and  theii' practical  judgment 
will  soon  give  the  lie  to  their  theoretical  opinions.  As  those 
speculatists,  who  argue  that  there  is  no  external  world,  will 
avoid  running  against  a  post,  or  into  the  fire,  as  carefully 
as  other  men,  so  they  who  endeavor  to  reason  themselves 
into  the  belief  that  virtue  and  vice  are  mere  notions  gener- 
ated by  education,  cannot  nevertheless  avoid  perceiving  that 
some  actions  are  base,  unjust,  or  ungrateful,  and  consequently 


164  THE   EQUITY  AND 

to  be  disapproved  of,  whether  committed  by  themselves  or 
others." 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  conscience  is  that  spiritual  sun 
within  us  whose  voice  proclaims  an  ever-present  God.  This 
arises  not  so  much  from  the  deductions  of  reason  as  from 
the  instructive  feeling  of  our  nature ;  assuring  us  that  the 
great  law  within,  universal  as  man,  must  have  an  author,  and 
that  the  Being  who  made  us  must,  with  the  conscience,  love 
the  good  and  hate  the  bad.  Other  evidences  of  the  goodness 
of  God  fall  immeasurably  short  of  this  in  conclusiveness  and 
power.  This  is  the  evidence  every  man  carries  about  with 
him  in  his  own  bosom, — immediate  in  its  decision  and  instruc- 
tive in  its  agency.  Thus,  we  tind  the  existence  of  conscience 
has  far  more  to  do  with  the  idea  of  God  and  his  righteous- 
ness than  is  often  imagined.  Man  feels  more  than  he  reas- 
ons. The  former  is  spontaneous,  while  the  latter  creeps 
with  slow  pace  over  the  ground.  With  undisciplined  minds 
this  is  peculiarly  true.  Thus,  we  see  the  fact  of  God's  exist- 
ence ;  and  his  goodness,  even  when  first  announced,  finds  a 
response  of  acquiescence  so  universal  in  the  conscience. 
Thus,  we  see  the  multitude  of  all  ages,  corrupt  as  they  may 
be,  and  ignorant  as  they  may  be,  yet  never  in  theory  disput- 
ing the  evidence  of  a  Supreme  Being,  and  his  goodness. 
Confused  as  may  be  their  idea  of  God,  erroneous  as  may  be 
the  conceptions  of  his  moral  character,  misguided  as  maybe 
the  homage  paid  to  false  idols,  yet  conscience,  however  per- 
verted, cannot  easily  be  made  to  give  up  the  idea  of  one 
infinite  Being  of  justice  and  goodness.  When  false  philoso- 
phy and  the  superstition  of  centuries  have  thrown  their  black 
foliage  over  the  foundation  of  the  greatest  of  truths,  and 
enveloped  thick  in  their  embrace  of  death  the  noblest  part 
of  man,  yet  conscience,  the  vxdl  of  adamant,  is  still  seen  by  the 
observer  through  the  chinks  and  openings  of  that  fatal 
drapery  that  surrounds  it. 

Most  convincingly  has  Pascal  said,  "We  know  the  truth 
not  only  by  the  reason  but  also  by  the  heart ;  it  is  by  the 
heart  that  we  know  first  principles,  and  it  is  in  vain  that  reas- 
oning, which  has  no  part  in  it,  tries  to  combat  them.     The 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  165 

Pjrrhoiiists,  whose  only  object  this  is,  strive  for  it  in  vain. 
We  know  that  we  do  not  dream,  however  impotent  we  may 
be  to  prove  it  b}^  reason ;  this  impotence  proves  nothing 
more  than  the  feebleness  of  our  reason,  but  not  the  uncer- 
tainty of  all  our  knowledge  as  they  pretend.  For  the  knowl- 
edge of  first  principles,  as  of  space,  time,  movement,  numbers, 
is  as  certain  as  any  of  those  that  our  reasonings  give  us. 
And  it  is  on  this  knowledge  of  the  heart  and  instinct  that 
reason  must  support  herself,  and  on  this  she  founds  her  whole 
procedure.  The  heart  feels  that  there  are  three  dimensions  in 
space,  and  that  numbers  are  infinite ;  and  the  reason  demon- 
strates its  course,  that  there  are  no  two  square  numbers  of 
which  one  is  double  the  other.  Principles  are  felt,  proposi- 
tions are  proved  ;  and  all  with  certaintj',  although  in  ditter- 
ent  ways ;  and  it  is  as  ridiculous  for  the  reason  to  demand  of 
the  heart  proofs  of  its  first  principles,  in  order  to  be  willing 
to  consent  to  them,  as  it  would  be  for  the  heart  to  demand 
of  the  reason  a  feeling  of  all  the  propositions  that  it  demon- 
strates in  order  to  be  willing  to  receive  them." 

The  great  author  of  the  moral  constitution  of  man  has  so 
made  it  that  it  shall  plainly  testify  to  two  things :  First, 
that  he  himself,  as  the  absolute,  the  infinite,  the  eternal,  loves 
supremely  duty ;  secondly,  that  he  loves  supremely  truth. 
If  we  keep  in  mind  the  ever  needful  distinction  between 
God's  work  and  man's  perversion,  we  shall  find  that  truth  is 
the  natural  end  for  which  the  mind  is  made,  even  as  duty  is 
that  for  which  the  moral  sensibilities  are  given.  The  melan- 
choly history  of  man  shows  that  God's  purpose  in  his  crea- 
tion is  frustrated  by  his  natural  love  of  error,  even  as  by  his 
inclination  to  fly  from  the  restraints  of  duty.  But,  because 
we  see  the  painful  evidence  that  man  is  wrong  in  his  head 
and  his  heart,  it  does  not  imply  that  man  is  made  for  error 
and  guilt.  It  does  not  imply  that  God  loves  either.  The 
whole  moral  constitution  of  man  speaks  out  against  this  in- 
ference. What  is  the  actual  fact  in  relation  to  the  intellect 
and  the  heart  ?  We  certainly  can  tell  the  use  of  an  axe, 
and  for  what  it  is  intended,  even  if  by  abuse  the  edge  of  it 
maybe  as  blunt  as  a  fence  rail,     xs'ow  the  intellect  was  made 


166  THE  EQUITY  AND 

for  truth.     First,  because  through  the  senses  in  their  appro- 
priate sphere  the  facts  of  the  outward  world  exactly  corre- 
spond to  the  internal  impressions  of  the  raind.     The  mind, 
using  the  senses  as  instruments,  is  not  deceived  in  relation  to 
external  things.     The  idea  mentally  of  a  tree,  a  brook,  a  hill, 
a  house,  corresponds  with  the  things  themselves.     This  is 
always  the    case  with  the    senses  legitimately  used.     And 
secondly,  the  professed  object  of  the  intellect  in  all  investi- 
gations is  truth.     Error  as  error  is  not  professed  to  be  the 
end  of  human  reason:  error  is  often  imbibed  instead  of  the 
truth;  but  the  very  fact  that  men  are  so  ashamed  to  confess 
that    they   are    seeking    error    rather    than    truth,    speaks 
volumes   in    favor   of  God's    making   the   mind   for  truth, 
and  to  be  satisiied  only  with  it.     What  are  all  the  fair  pre- 
tenses of  error  and  its  crooked  by-paths  but  the  unwilling- 
concession  of  the  mind  to  the  worth  of  truth !    Truth  d^->es 
not  hide  its  face  as  error  does.     Truth  stands  upon  its  own 
merits,  w^hile  error  is   ever  aiming  to  clothe  its  loathsome 
body  with  the  garb  of  truth.     It  will  steal  its  semblance  if  it 
cannot  glory  in  its  reality.     Truth  is  constantly  counterfeited, 
because  error  seen  in  its  naked  hideousness  revolts  the  mind. 
But  why  should  the  mind  revolt  at  error  undisguised  if  it 
was  made  for  it  ?     If  truth  is  a  matter  of  indiiFerence  with 
God,  why  does  he  speak  out  so  loudly  in  its  favor  in  man's 
moral  constitution  ?     If  the  false  currency  of  error  is  all  the 
same  with  the  Deity  as  the  genuine  gold  of  truth,  why  has  he 
made  the  human  mind  so  ashamed  of  error  when  exposed, 
and  so  coniident  and  jpj'ful  even  when  truth  is  established  ? 
The  moral  constitution  is  made  not  only  for  the  actual  reali- 
ties of  life,  but  the  love  of  error  and  habitual  self-deception 
will  put  it  all  out  of  tune,  and,  like  a  sweet  instrument  of 
music  with  the  strings  out  of  place,  the  very  discords  given 
will  show  the  perversion  of  that  purpose  for  which  it  was  in- 
tended.    All  the  professions  of  men  boasting  that  they  are 
in  search  of  the  truth,  reveal  the  great  fact  that  error  is  not 
a  normal  condition  of  the  mind,  but  an  abnormal  condition. 
God   designed   the  mind  to  find  out   truth,  and  not  to  be 
cheated  every  hour  Avith  delusions.     As  a  melancholy  fact. 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  167 

men  do  constantly  and  perseveringly  practice  self-deception. 
Reason  is  ever  getting  out  of  its  sphere,  and  pretending  to 
decide  things,  where  there  is  a  perfect  incompetence  of 
knowledge.  Back  of  the  reason  there  is  the  will  and  aiFec- 
tions  ;  and  if  error  is  followed  after  more  than  truth,  does  not 
Revelation  give  the  solution  to  the  difficulty  in  the  words : 
"And  this  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is  come  into  the 
world;  and  men  loved  darkness  rather  than  light  because 
their  deeds  were  evil." 

Equally  evident  is  it  that  God  made  the  heart  for  duty. 
All  our  moral  sensibilities  speak  out  the  momentous  truth 
that  their  great  Author  is  good  and  loves  good  in  his  crea- 
tures, that  truth  and  duty  should  be  the  aim  of  every  moral 
agent.  JllTothing  more  strikingly  illustrates  God's  end  in 
man's  creation  than  the  universal  principle  upon  which  all 
civil  law,  all  criminal  law,  and  all  courts  of  justice  are  based. 
Two  words  sum  up  the  professed  end  of  all  human  govern- 
ment, truth  and  duty.  However  philosophers  may  reason, 
mankind  can  assume  no  other  end  in  human  law ;  human 
law  may  be  oppressive,  but  it  does  not  label  oppression  upon 
its  face  ;  civil  enactments  may  be  unjust,  but  they  never  pro- 
fess to  seek  injustice  rather  than  justice;  human  decisions 
may  be  erroneous,  but  they  never  acknowledge  that  error 
rather  than  truth  is  aimed  at.  It  is  not  thus  that  error  and 
injustice  walk  the  earth;  their  danger  lies  in  their  conceal- 
ment, not  their  exposure.  Here,  then,  is  the  stubborn  fact 
that  alwaj's  arrays  itself  against  the  atheist,  the  pantheist, 
and  the  materialist.  Mankind  do  act  upon  the  principle, 
whatever  may  be  its  misapplication,  of  treating  vice  as  vice, 
virtue  as  virtue,  truth  as  truth,  and  error  as  error.  Law  does 
profess  and  seek  to  carry  out  the  great  end  of  punishing  vice, 
protecting  virtue,  exposing  error,  and  vindicating  truth. 
Law  professing  a  different  end  would  not  be  tolerated ; 
humanity,  corrupt  as  it  is,  rises  up  in  wrath  against  legalized 
injustice  when  exposed  and  judicial  error  unmasked.  Ob- 
serve how  crime  when  punished  is  approved  of;  how  inno- 
cence tortured  is  condemned.  Observe  how  the  universal 
voice  of  humanity  calls  for  law,  simply  because  the  end  pro- 


168  THE  EQUITY  AND 

fessed  of  law  is  truth  and  duty.  Now  this  end,  universally 
professed  by  human  law,  shows  clearly  that  the  common 
judgment  of  mankind  in  relation  to  truth  and  error,  virtue 
and  vice,  has  its  foundation  in  the  consciousness  or  heart;  it 
is  all  based  upon  those  first  principles  which  no  ingenuity  or 
reasoning  can  ignore.  Indeed,  those  very  philosophers  who 
loudly  declaim  against  human  personality  and  freedom  and 
responsibility;  who  confound  moral  agency  with  the  fatalism 
of  mere  law,  and  convert  the  great  element  of  personality 
into  a  thing ;  those  who  disregard  the  essential  distinction 
between  mind  and  matter,  or  who  so  deify  cause  and  efi:ect 
as  to  exclude  the  First  Great  Cause,  all  are  compelled  to  go 
upon  the  common  principle  of  human  law,  that  never  ques- 
tions the  fact  of  the  fundamental  distinction  between  virtue 
and  vice,  truth  and  error.  Those  philosophers  who  build  in 
their  minds  such  fine  castles  of  speculation,  have  as  a  plain 
fact  to  confess  their  folly  and  repudiate  their  conclusions 
whenever  they  are  brought  into  collision  with  the  actual 
verities  of  life.  Whatever  may  be  the  theories  of  philoso- 
phers who  seek  to  transcend  the  natural  limits  of  reason  and 
deny  the  facts  of  consciousness,  their  practice  in  the  every- 
day concerns  of  life  shows  that  they  believe  quite  as  firmly, 
when  their  own  interests  are  at  stake,  in  personality,  freedom, 
truth,  error,  virtue,  vice,  and  moral  responsibility,  as  the 
great  multitude  who  never  have  had  the  presumption  to 
deny  these  things.  All  punishment  and  reward  have  their 
reason  in  the  first  truths  of  consciousness.  The  very  oaths 
taken  in  a  court  of  law  involve  the  idea  of  divine  authority 
and  human  dependence  and  responsibility  to  it,  confirmed  by 
that  universal  consciousness  that  teaches  man  that  he  is  a 
person,  and  an  accountable  person.  Now  the  certainty  that  the 
earth  turns  round  upon  its  axis,  or  makes  an  annual  revolu- 
tion around  the  sun,  is  not  more  firmly  established  than  the 
facts  of  consciousness.  It  is  a  great  truth,  that  deny  them 
as  we  may,  we  all  of  us  have  to  act  upon  them ;  all  law  is 
built  upon  them ;  all  correct  reason  must  use  them  as  axioms. 
When  a  certain  slave,  punished  for  theft,  exclaimed  to  his 
master,  "I  am  fated  (that  is,  necessitated)  to  steal,"  that  mas- 


BENEVOLENCE   OF  GOD.  169 

terwas  glad  to  repudiate  iu  practice  his  fine-spun  philosophy 
by  replying  to  him,  "  And  you  are  also/afeo?  to  he  ivhipjml." 

Looking,  then,  to  the  universally  admitted  facts  of  con- 
sciousness, and  considering  the  intuitive  conviction  of  the 
certainty  of  these  facts,  can  we  come  to  any  other  conclusion 
than  this, — that  God,  who  made  the  human  consciousness 
and  heart  even  as  the  intellect  and  faculty  of  reasoning,  in- 
tended that  man's  moral  constitution  should  recognize  the 
personality  and  benevolence  of  God  himself?  Judging  of 
the  maker  by  his  workmanship,  do  we  not  find  in  the  all-per- 
vading conviction  of  human  personality,  of  freedom,  of  moral 
responsibility,  of  cause  and  effect,  of  the  necessity  and  excel- 
lence of  virtue  and  truth,  of  the  folly  and  injury  of  error  and 
vice,  and  the  professed  end  of  all  law  to  arrive  at  truth  and 
establish  justice,  the  certain  evidence  that  if  such  is  God's 
work,  such  the  established  order  of  the  world  without  us  and 
within  us,  then,  notwithstanding  the  perversity  of  the  mind 
of  man,  his  sinfulness  and  his  guilt,  notwithstanding  the  prev- 
alence of  error  and  crime,  the  character  of  God  is  vindicated, 
and  his  being  shown  forth  in  his  personality  and  freedom  as 
infinit>»'j  wise,  benevolent,  and  just? 


CHAPTER   XX. 

"the  problem  of  physical  axd  moral  evil." 

It  will  be  our  object  to  show  that  there  have  been  ideas 
attached  to  the  import  of  the  words  omnipotence  and  infinite 
benevolence  altogether  erroneous,  and  speculations  upon  what 
the  Deity  might  do  or  ought  to  do,  in  every  respect  unbe- 
cominor  the  limited  rans^e  of  the  human  mind. 

"  We  have  explained  enough,"  says  Leibnitz,  "  when  we 
have  shown  that  there  are  cases  where  some  disorder  in  a  part 
is  necessary  to  the  production  of  the  greatest  order  in  the 
whole.  But  M.  Boyle,  it  appears,  demands  a  little  too  much. 
He  wishes  that  we  should  show  him  in  detail  how  evil  is  linked 
with  the  best  possible  plan  of  a  universe.  This  would  be  a 
perfect  explanation  of  the  phenomena.  But  we  undertake 
not  to  o^ive  it,  and  what  is  more,  we  are  not  obliged  to  give 
it,  a  thing  impossible  in  the  present  state.  It  is  enough  for 
us  to  make  the  observation,  that  nothing  hinders,  but  that  a 
certain  particular  evil  maybe  linked  with  that  which,  viewed 
in  its  totality,  is  the  best.  This  imperfect  explanation,  and 
which  leaves  something  to  be  discovered  in  another  life,  is 
sufficient  for  a  solution  of  objections,  but  not  for  a  compre- 
hension of  the  thing." 

This  opinion  of  Leibnitz  is  deserving  of  careful  considera- 
tion. His  hypothesis  in  respect  to  the  introduction  of  evil 
presents  a  serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of  those  who  would 
imagine  that  its  existence  implied  a  deficiency  in  the  benevo- 
lence of  God.  TVhether  correct  or  incorrect,  it  answers  a 
most  useful  purpose  in  throwing  the  burden  of  proof  against 
the  divine  benevolence  upon  the  hands  of  skeptics.  The 
skeptic  at  least  cannot  say  the  present  system  may  not  on 
the  whole  be  the  best  possible  to  God;  that  his  present 
(170) 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL  AND  MORAL  EVIL.     171 

universe,  in  its  totality,  witli  the  disorder  of  sin,  may  not  be 
better  than  any  other  possible  universe  to  God.  Reasoning 
alone  upon  the  ground  that  the  greatest  amount  of  happiness 
is  the  greatest  good,  the  skeptic,  upon  that  assumption,  cannot 
say  that  for  aught  he  knows  there  may  not  in  its  totality 
be  a  greater  amount  of  happiness  in  the  present  universe 
with  the  incidental  permission  of  evil,  than  would  be  in 
another  universe  with  no  sin  in  it.  If  the  greatest  good  is  to 
be  measured  by  the  greatest  happiness  in  the  aggregate,  how 
does  the  skeptic  know  but  that  the  present  universe  embodies 
more  happiness  than  any  other  possible  universe  ?  How  does 
he  know  but  that  a  more  permanent  and  larger  increase  of 
good  may  result  from  the  present  order  of  things  than  from 
any  other  ?  Is  the  skeptic  capable  of  prescribing  to  God  what 
should  be  his  best  kind  of  universe  ?  Does  he  know  that 
anything  better,  upon  the  whole,  can  be  done  than  has  been 
done?  Admitting  that  among  all  those  possible  universes 
present  to  the  mind  of  the  Deity  there  was  the  weighing  in 
scales  the  aggregate  happiness  of  each  separate  universe,  can 
the  skeptic  say  that  among  them  all  the  present  universe, 
called  into  existence  by  God,  was  not  the  best?  Can  his  own 
limited  mind  pronounce  that  God  might  do  better  than  he 
has  done  ?  Can  he  say  that  there  is  a  defect  in  divine  power 
or  goodness  ? 

But  the  difficulty  of  the  skeptic  is  greatly  augmented  when 
he  carefully  ponders  the  real  value  of  free  moral  agency. 
One  thing  is  certain  :  if  sin  is  not  possible,  neither  is  virtue  ; 
if  wrong  cannot  be  committed,  neither  can  right;  if  there  is 
no  power  to  do  evil,  neither  is  their  power  to  do  good ;  if 
freedom  of  choice  cannot  exist  in  wickedness,  neither  can  it 
in  holiness.  The  power  of  choice  implies  something  to 
choose  between,  vife.:  the  existence  of  two  things,  and  one 
diiierent  from  the  other. 

Free  moral  agency  presupposes  in  its  nature  the  possi- 
bility of  sin :  for  freedom  in  a  creature  to  exist,  there  must 
be  the  liberty  of  choice  between  the  good  and  the  evil. 
The  question  is  not  then,  whether  a  free  moral  agent  cannot 
sin,  but  whether  he  may  not  sin,  and  yet  God  do  all  things 


172  THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL 

for  the  best.  It  is  whether  sin  and  misery  ma}'  not  exist,  and 
yet  the  present  universe  be  the  best  possible  to  God. 

We  think  the  hypothesis  of  Leibnitz,  upon  the  supposition 
that  the  greatest  good  is  the  greatest  amount  of  happiness, 
impossible  to  be  refuted.  As  such,  the  burden  of  proof  is  all 
upon  the  side  of  the  skeptic ;  and,  until  he  can  show  the  con- 
trary, he  has  no  business  to  point  to  the  existence  of  evil  as 
in  any  respect  implying  a  defect  in  the  goodness  or  in  the 
benevolence  of  God.  It  is  not  for  the  skeptic  to  call  upon 
the  Christian  believer  to  unravel  the  profound  intricacies  of 
the  problem  of  moral  evil.  The  Christian  but  poorly  under- 
stands the  real  strength  of  his  available  ground  when  he 
thinks  it  necessary  to  explain  everything  before  he  can  call 
upon  his  opponent  to  believe.  Most  happily  has  Leibnitz 
thrown  into  the  face  of  his  learned  adversary  the  unanswera- 
ble w^ords  :  "  But  M.  Boyle,  it  appears,  demands  a  little  too 
much.  He  thinks  that  we  should  show  him  in  detail  how 
evil  is  linked  with  the  best  possible  plan  of  a  universe.  This 
would  he  a  yerfect  explanation  of  the  j^henomena." 

]Srot  only  is  it  self-evident  that  this  would  be  a  perfect 
explanation  of  the  phenomena,  but  it  is  equally  certain  that 
such  an  explanation  is  impossible  to  a  finite  mind.  We 
stand  not  at  the  commencement  of  the  great  chain  of  Divine 
Providence,  but  more  truly  in  the  middle  of  that  chain.  Be- 
hind us  is  a  boundless  eternity,  before  us  lie  ages  everlasting. 
How  then,  in  the  nature  of  things,  can  we  take  into  detail 
the  universe  of  God  ?  How  are  we  capable  of  sounding  the 
deeps  of  God's  providence?  When  we  measure  wnth  our 
short  line  and  plummet,  are  we  conscious  how  vast  is  that 
distance  down  which  we  think  to  go  ?  What  arrogance  then 
to  call  upon  the  believer  in  God's  inlinite  goodness  to  explain 
in  detail  the  permission  of  evil  ?  Witfi  the  innumerable 
positive  proofs  of  the  Divine  goodness  before  him,  is  the 
skeptic  at  liberty  to  question  the  fact  of  God's  benevolence, 
because  he  may  not  be  able  to  see  into  the  mystery  of  the 
moral  disorder  that  reigns  in  the  world  ? 

Says  Lactantius,  who  professes  to  have  taken  his  views 
from  Epicurus :  "  The  Deity  is  either  willing  to  take  away 


AND  MORAL   EVIL.  I73 

all  evil,  but  is  not  able  to  do  so,  in  which  case  he  is  not  om- 
nipotent, or  he  is  able  to  remove  the  evil,  but  is  not  willing, 
in  which  case  he  is  not  benevolent;  or  he  is  neither  willing 
nor  able,  which  is  a  denial  of  the  perfections  of  God  ;  or  he  is 
both  able  and  willing  to  do  away  with  the  evil,  and  yet  it 
exists." 

This  dilemma,  that  at  first  sight  appears  so  plausible,  van- 
ishes upon  a  nearer  investigation.  What  does  this  dilemma 
involve?  Simply  an  assertion  that  cannot  be  proved, — even 
the  competence  of  a  finite  mind  to  prescribe  what  omnipo- 
tence can  do,  and  what  infinite  benevolence  should  do.  But 
can  any  scale  be  constructed  by  which  we  may  measure  infi- 
nite power  and  benevolence  ?  Are  we  not  aware  that  when 
we  separately  contemplate  the  two  attributes  of  infinite  power 
and  goodness,  we  must  look  not  to  the  outward  development, 
but  the  principle  itself  of  Divine  power  and  goodness  ?  If  we 
supposed  omnipotence  exhausted  itself  in  the  works  of  crea- 
tion, if  there  was  no  other  world  or  being  that  God  could 
make,  then  would  not  such  an  idea  limit  the  infinity  of  God's 
power  ?  Suppose  the  full  compliment  of  worlds  and  beings 
made  up  in  the  universe,  if  God  could  add  nothing  more, 
would  his  power  be  unlimited  ?  If  all  possible  exercise 
of  power  is  restricted  to  the  present  universe,  then  some- 
thing more  would  be  impossible.  Suppose  that  universe 
had  in  it  a  thousand  degrees  of  happiness,  one  more  de- 
gree added  would  not  be  in  the  power  of  God.  Equally 
vague  is  the  idea  of  the  word  infinite  as  applied  to  Divine 
benevolence. 

In  the  ver}"  nature  of  things  that  which  is  infinite  cannot 
be  restricted  to  actual  development^  otherwise  the  infinite  would 
be  finite.  The  measure  of  the  infinit}-  of  God  is  to  be  esti- 
mated from  what  he  can  do, — from  the  boundless  resources 
within  his  nature, — not  the  outward  manifestation  of  that 
nature.  There  is  a  necessary  limit  to  a  finite  being  of  power 
even  as  of  goodness ;  but  the  infinite  being  cannot  exhaust 
his  power  or  benevolence  in  outward  development,  or  he 
would  cease  to  be  infinite  and  become  finite.  All  works 
must  have  an  end ;  that  w^hich  has  a  beginning  in  number 


174  THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL 

must  have  a  termination  in  number.  There  is  a  limit  to  the 
universe  or  there  could  be  no  commencement;  as  the  uni- 
verse is  the  aggregate  of  parts,  so  one  part  taken  away  or 
something  added  that  did  not  exist  before,  diminishes  or 
increases  the  number  that  goes  to  make  np  the  whole.  Con- 
sequently, if  the  amount  could  not  be  increased,  would  not 
the  universe  be  the  measure  of  the  divine  power  rather  than 
the  manifestation  of  it  ?  It  should  never  be  forgotten,  that 
it  is  wholly  beyond  the  finite  mind  to  prescribe  bounds  either 
to  the  power  or  to  the  goodness  of  God. 

What  constitutes  the  essential  idea  of  the  infinity  of  the 
attributes  of  God  is  the  fact  that  the  measure  of  it  exists  in 
the  nature  of  God,  not  in  the  outward  developments  of  God 
in  the  universe.  The  world  we  live  in  reveals  the  boundless 
power  and  goodness  of  God,  but  it  does  not  prescribe  that 
power  or  goodness,  neither  does  the  universe  do  it.  God, 
as  infinite,  must  have  in  himself  resources  transcendentally 
greater  than  any  outward  development  of  these  resources. 

"  The  greatest  possible  efibrt  of  infinite  power,"  says  Presi- 
dent Appleton,  "  is  a  solecism  in  language.  Infinite  power  is 
a  power  without  limits,  but  every  effect  is,  and  must  be,  finite. 
It  is  absurd  to  speak  of  an  effect  equal  to  infinite  power;  and 
it  is  impossible  to  imagine  any  effect  so  great  that  God  can- 
not produce  a  greater;  for  if  all  the  creatures  now  existing 
were  elevated  to  the  nature  and  dignity  of  angels,  still,  as 
there  is  no  7ie  plus  ultra  of  Almighty  power,  they  might  be 
raised  still  higher.  Besides,  their  number  might  be  increased. 
But  number  implies  limits;  let  it  be  doubled,  trebled,  or 
multiplied  by  a  million,  still  the  product  has  limits;  and  a 
limited  effect  bears  no  proportion  to  an  unlimited  cause.  All 
the  objections  to  the  goodness  of  God  on  account  of  his  not 
having  produced  happiness  to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  do 
therefore  rest  on  absurdity.  But  suppose  it  were  otherwise, 
and  the  greatest  possible  effort  of  infinite  power  did  not 
imply  a  contradiction,  it  would  still  be  perfectly  beyond  such 
limited  capacities  as  ours  to  ascertain  whether  Deity  had  pro- 
ceeded to  the  utmost  extent  of  such  power  in  the  production 
of    happiness.     Consequently,  if  the    objection    were    well- 


AND  MORAL   EVIL.  175 

founded,  it  would  be  impossible  for  Deity  himself  to  enable 
human  creatures  to  ascertain  his  goodness." 

One  object  in  this  valuable  quotation  is  to  make  clear  the 
great  truth,  that  no  finite  mind  can  prescribe  bounds  to  the 
power  or  the  goodness  of  God.  The  actual  development  can 
bear  no  comparison  to  the  infinite  cause.  We  have  alluded 
to  the  theory  of  Leibnitz,  upon  the  best  possible  system  of  the 
universe,  not  because  we  are  partial  to  his  optimism,  which 
we  believe  is  open  to  objection,  but  because  we  think  his 
theory  at  least  impossible  to  be  refuted  by  that  class  of  minds 
who  are  so  fond  of  weighing  in  the  scales  the  necessarj-  quan- 
tity of  the  divine  power  and  goodness ;  who  reason  as  if  virtue 
and  liappiness  were  ponderable  things,  and  as  susceptible  of 
measurement  and  weight  as  sugar  and  corn  ;  but  the  fact  is, 
virtue  and  happiness  are  not  capable  of  being  weighed  b}- 
any  analogy  with  material  things.  They  refer  to  qualities  of 
moral  agents,  acts  of  responsible  beings.  Virtue  and  happi- 
ness are  abstract  ideas,  that  apply  not  to  the  aggregate,  but  to 
the  individuals  that  make  it  up.  It  is  not  the  univei'se  that 
is  to  be  looked  at,  but  each  responsible  agent  in  it.  We  are  to 
determine  the  quantity  of  virtue  and  happiness  not  by  a 
general  abstraction  that  hems  in  the  whole  universe,  but  by 
the  merit  of  each  individual  in  that  universe.  The  divine 
equity  is  vindicated  if  full  justice  is  done  to  the  individual, 
no  matter  where  in  the  scale  of  being  he  commenced,  or 
where  he  ended.  It  is  the  separate  sphere  where  each  act 
that  God  looks  at,  not  the  whole  with  all  compounded 
together. 

Let  us  examine  what  should  be  the  chief  end,  and  what  is 
the  highest  interest  of  man, — what,  in  truth,  is  the  greatest 
good.  Is  it  liappiness  or  virtue  ?  Is  it  right  or  pleasure  ?  Is 
it  to  be  virtuous  w^e  should  chiefly  live  for,  or  is  it  to  be  happy  ? 
When  we  contrast  the  two  together,  is  not  virtue  the  highest 
of  the  two?  The  problem  of  the  existence  of  physical  and 
moral  evil  is  relieved  of  its  greatest  difficulty  when  vii-tue  is 
considered  a  greater  good  than  happiness.  God's  chief  end 
in  creation  is  not  then  to  produce  so  much  the  greatest  hap- 
piness, as  the  greatest  virtue;  not  to  propose,  as  the  highest 


176  THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL 

end  to  a  moral  agent,  pleasure  as  duty.  Happiness  indeed  is 
connected  with  virtue,  but  it  is  the  fruit,  not  the  nature  itself 
of  virtue, — the  servant  but  not  the  master. 

But  if  virtue  is  the  highest  interest  of  man,  is  not  the  lib- 
erty to  do  wrong  essential  to  its  very  existence?  Would 
there  be  any  virtue  if  there  was  nothing  to  test  it?  If  we 
took  away  freedom,  where  would  be  the  development  of 
right  conduct?  If  we  removed  harm  and  suffering,  where 
would  be  the  virtues  of  patience,  of  courage,  of  endurance, 
of  compassion,  and  of  mercy  ?  Suppose  the  present  universe 
did  not  secure,  in  the  aggregate,  the  greatest  possible  happi- 
ness, who  can  sa}'  that  it  does  not  the  greatest  possible  virtue? 
Suppose  the  ultimate  stock  of  pleasure  by  the  existence  of 
physical  and  moral  evil  diminished,  who  can  say  the  devel- 
opment of  right  may  not  be  immeasurably  increased  ?  Sup- 
pose our  finite  minds  might  weigh  the  ultimate  amount  of 
pleasure,  and  we  should  find  it  less  than  in  some  other  pos- 
sible universe,  would  not  a  vastly  nobler  manifestation  of 
right,  a  more  brilliant  development  of  virtue,  more  than 
compensate  for  the  loss? 

But  divine  goodness  is  relieved  of  all  objection  if  it  can 
be  shown  that  anj-  suffering,  any  moral  evil,  is  consistent 
with  infinite  benevolence.  It  is  unnecessary  for  us  to  dis- 
cuss the  full  amount,  the  extent,  of  moral  or  physical  evil ; 
all  that  we  have  to  do  is  to  show  that  any  is  consistent  with 
the  goodness  of  God.  No  matter  how  large  the  amount  of 
evil,  yet  if  some  can  be  shown  to  be  consistent  with  divine 
benevolence,  then  the  question  at  once  is  settled  as  to  the 
consistency  of  the  permission  of  physical  and  moral  evil 
with  infinite  benevolence.  For  if  some  evil  is  necessary,  or 
consistent  with  the  goodness  of  God,  why  not  the  existence 
of  all  the  present  physical  and  moral  evil  ?  Can  any  person 
be  competent  to  prescribe  to  Omnipotence  what  he  should 
do,  where'  he  should  stop,  or  how  much  evil  it  is  proper  for 
him  to  permit  in  his  universe  ?  If  the  greatest  good  is  vir- 
tue and  not  the  highest  pleasure,  right  and  not  the  greatest 
happiness;  if  duty  is  man's  noblest  interest,  and  not  joy, — 


AND   MORAL   EVIL.  177 

then  who  can  say  that  the  present  systen  is  not  on  the  whole 
the  best  for  God  to  make  ? 

Let  us  then  carefully  examine  whether  any  evil,  physical 
or  moral,  is  consistent  with  the  benevolence  of  God.  Let 
us  commence  with  the  lower  order  of  creation.  Pain  and 
death  to  the  brutes  are  evils;  but  would  animal  existence  be 
possible,  constituted  as  the  world  is,  without  death  ?  Is  not 
the  aggregate  amount  of  happiness  vastly  increased  hy  the 
number  of  the  inferior  animals  who  come  into  existence  ? 
Would  myriads  of  creatures  enjoy  existence  unless  death  had 
granted  to  them  a  sphere  of  enjoyment  by  the  removal  of  a 
surplus  number?  Estimating,  where  virtue  and  vice  are 
impossible,  the  goodness  of  God  by  the  greatest  amount  of 
happiness,  can  it  be  shown  that  as  much  enjoyment  would 
exist  in  the  animal  kingdom  without  death  as  with  it?  Con- 
sider, also,  that  death  renders  certain  an  inconceivably 
greater  number  to  enjoy  life.  Consider  again,  that  if  it  is  a 
gratuitous  blessing  to  give  life ;  if  the  creature  brought  into 
being  had,  previous  to  existence,  no  claim  upon  God  for  the 
enjoyments  granted  in  life,  then  certainly  a  creature  has  no 
claim  upon  God  for  endless  existence.  If  no  favor  was  due 
the  creature  before  existence,  certainly  there  can  be  no 
demand  upon  God  for  a  deathless  being. 

But  the  question  at  once  is  settled  of  the  goodness  of  in- 
flicting death,  when  the  momentary  evil  is  contrasted  with 
the  vast  amount  of  enjoyment  afforded.  Consider  how  great 
is  that  enjoyment  even  among  the  lowest  orders  of  creation ! 
If  we  could  imagine  them  endowed  with  foresight,  would 
they  not  prefer  their  joyous  life  to  having  no  life,  and  with 
it  no  death  ?  If  the  cup  of  existence  with  its  few  pains  was 
offered  in  one  hand,  and  non-existence  with  no  pain  in  the 
other,  would  it  be  difficult  to  determine  which  would  be 
chosen  ?  Contemplate  the  few  pains  that  happen  to  the 
brute  creation.  Now  pain  can  be  shown  in  the  present  con- 
stitution of  things  to  be  a  positive  blessing.  In  the  vast 
majority  of  cases,  to  every  individual  of  the  brute  creation, 
it  comes  only  at  extremely  long  intervals  of  their  existence. 
The  whole  life  is  passed  in  enjoyment,  in  most  cases,  with 

12 


178  THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL 

only  the  momentary  uneasiness  of  death.  Animals  not  hav- 
ing human  reason  do  not  anticipate  with  dread  their  death. 
'^ov  are  the  pains  upon  the  whole  much  greater  than  what 
are  absolutely  needful  for  their  preservation.  Bodily  pain  is 
the  sentinel  that  keeps  watch  over  the  system.  Had  animals 
no  pain,  no  dread  instinctive  of  suffering,  it  is  inconceivable 
how  they  could  exist.  No  efforts  would  be  made  to  avert 
danger — no  exertion  to  avoid  destruction.  The  brute  crea- 
tion have  just  enough  of  uneasiness  to  urge  to  active  eflbrt 
to  avoid  physical  evil.  Animals  are  placed  under  just  enough 
of  restraint  to  secure  them  from  perpetual  ruin. 

]^or  is  the  degree  of  pain  equal  with  all.  The  lower  down 
we  go  in  the  animal  scale  the  simpler  the  organization,  the 
more  limited  the  sphere  of  exercise  or  enjoyment,  the  more 
inferior  the  faculties,  the  less  we  have  reason  to  believe  is 
the  sensation  of  pain.  Thus,  as  a  compensation  for  a  rela- 
tive degradation  in  the  scale  of  animal  life,  we  see  a  diminution 
of  all  sensibility  to  suffering.  The  head  of  a  dragon-fly  will 
eat  after  it  is  severed  from  the  body.  One  remarkable  pecu- 
liarity in  respect  to  pain,  and  which  reveals  the  benevolence 
of  God,  is,  that  the  nerves  that  give  the  sensation  of  pain  are 
mostly  upon  the  surface  of  the  body,  and  the  deeper  the  in- 
cision of  the  knife  the  less  the  pain.  Thus,  where  it  is  most 
needed  we  find  pain,  and  where  it  is  less  needed  less  pain. 
Upon  the  surface  of  the  body  there  exists  most  danger,  and 
there  is  needed  upon  the  surface  of  the  body  greater  warn- 
ing. The  peculiarity  of  animal  life  is,  that  its  existence 
every  moment  would  be  endangered  were  it  not  for  the  prin- 
ciple of  fear  engendered  by  pain.  Can,  then,  the  existence  of 
physical  evil  to  the  lower  orders  of  creation  conflict  in  any 
degree  with  the  benevolence  of  God  ?  Do  we  not  find  it 
even  a  strong  evidence  of  divine  goodness?  Could  it  be, 
under  the  present  constitution  of  things,  dispensed  with 
without  great  detriment  ?  Here,  then,  is  one  step  taken 
to  show  that  some  evil  is  clearly  consistent  with  infinite 
benevolence  ! 

Let  us,  then,  ascend  up  to  a  higher  order  of  creatures :  let 
us  take  man.     Here  we  come  to  a  free  moral  agent ;  here  we 


AND  MORAL   EVIL.  179 

find  conscience,  a  moral  sense,  the  feeling  of  responsibility 
and  obligation.  If  man  is  a  free  moral  agent,  then  the  pos- 
sibility of  his  fiilling  into  sin  is  directly  involved  in  it.  Then 
there  must  be  liberty  of  choice,  the  ability  of  choosing  between 
the  good  and  the  bad,  the  inherent  power  of  being  virtuous  or 
vicious.  The  freedom  involved  in  man's  moral  nature  must 
enable  him  to  obey  or  disobey.  Can  the  objector  to  the 
divine  goodness — because  man  is  a  sinner,  and  therefore  liable 
to  sufi^ering  and  punishment — say  that  it  would  be  better 
that  man's  freedom  should  be  taken  awa}-,  that  his  liberty 
should  cease  to  exist,  than  that  he  should  be  liable  to  evils 
so  great  ? 

Remove  human  freedom,  and  what  is  the  result?  Is  it 
not  the  absence  of  that  which  is  man's  highest  privilege 
and  most  exalted  dignity  ?  Is  God  to  be  blamed  because 
man  so  perverts  his  highest  prerogative  ?  Because  man's 
freedom  can  be  made  the  instrument  of  his  ruin,  is  that  a 
reason  why  infinite  benevolence  should  not  bestow  it?  Must 
then  there  be,  as  the  only  alternative,  the  nature  of  brutes? 
Is  the  goodness  of  God  to  be  impeached  because  there  may 
be  involved  in  the  most  costly  gift  a  greater  evil  from  its 
abuse  ?  Would  it  be  a  blessing  to  have  no  conscience,  no 
freedom  of  choice,  no  exalted  powers  of  man  made  in  the 
image  of  God,  because  that  very  moral  agency  involves  in  it 
the  essential  power  of  free  choice  ?  Is  compulsory  virtue, 
virtue?  Is  forced  freedom,  freedom?  Do  we  want  to  be 
brutified,  with  no  other  power  to  guide  than  instinct?  Do 
we  ask  for  mechanical  action,  and  the  disrobing  of  our  na- 
tures of  reason,  of  conscience,  and  the  angelic  power  of  moral 
faculties?  Is  such  the  price  we  would  be  willing  to  pay  for 
exemption  from  moral  evil  ? 

But  the  fact  that  virtue,  not  happiness,  duty,  not  pleas- 
ure, right,  not  jo}',  is  the  greatest  good  and  our  highest  in- 
terest, relieves  the  subject  of  moral  and  physical  evil  of  its 
greatest  difiiculty.  So  long  as  we  look  upon  happiness  as  the 
greatest  good,  and  the  greatest  happiness  as  the  greatest  end, 
the  mind  will  insensibly  fall  into  the  notion  of  happiness  as 
if  it  was  subject  to  weight  and  measure,  and  the  chief  thing 


180  THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL 

to  be  considered  in  relation  to  man.  Consequently  we  shall 
imbibe  the  idea  of  the  present  sj'stera  with  Leibnitz,  as  the 
best  possible  with  God,  and  b}'  onr  peculiar  theory  of  opti- 
mism directly,  if  not  knowingly,  limit  divine  power  or  good- 
ness. What  other  inference  but  this,  while  happiness,  not 
virtue,  pleasure,  not  duty,  is  made  the  greatest  good?  But 
exalt  the  idea  of  right,  the  principle  of  virtue,  above  happi- 
ness, and  then  at  once  the  inference  is  conclusive  that  hap- 
piness and  pleasure,  as  subordinate,  may  before  the  higher 
principle  of  virtue  and  duty  be  sacrificed.  The  only  question 
we  ever  need  ask  is.  What  will  make  us  virtuous?  not.  What 
will  make  us  happy?  Then  shall  we  judge  not  only  that 
happiness  is  inferior  to  virtue,  but  must  always  make  way 
for  it :  so  for  then,  under  certain  circumstances,  have  we  any 
reason  to  doubt  of  the  goodness  of  God  because  of  the  de- 
nial of  happiness,  that  we  are  compelled  to  admit  that  a 
much  higher  blessing  would  be  lost  unless  there  was  the 
sacrifice  of  happiness. 

The  idea  that  suffering  and  pain,  physical  and  mental, 
throw  doubt  upon  the  goodness  of  God  is  at  once  shown 
fallacious,  when  we  consider  that  such  suffering  may  be 
essential  for  the  trial  of  virtue, — that  the  noblest  develop- 
ment of  virtue  may  be  in  a  state  of  probation, — that  the 
world,  as  a  scene  of  discipline,  may  be  the  best  possible  for 
man  a  sinner, — that  with  wrong  committed  and  liberty  per- 
verted, there  must  be  sutfering  and  pain.  Such  an  idea 
makes  every  objection  to  the  goodness  of  God  from  the 
existence  of  evil  altogether  without  foundation.  The  great 
law  of  our  finite  condition  is  progress,  not  attainment. 
Happiness,  however  great,  is  not  the  great  end  :  virtue  is  the 
grand  end.  But  virtue  is  action,  not  a  state ;  it  implies 
effort,  increase,  constant  progress.  Happiness  is  being, 
virtue  is  doing ;  consequently  the  cultivation  of  virtue — the 
giving  to  moral  agents  the  noblest  sphere  for  its  exercise — 
is  a  higher  end  in  creation  than  happiness. 

Temptation,  evil,  pain,  trial,  danger,  may  be  necessarj'  to 
secure  the  noblest  end  of  virtue,  l^one  can  say  it  is  not  so. 
None  can  aflirm  that  God  has  not  chosen  the  best  system  for 


AND  MORAL   EVIL.  181 

such  an  object.  None  can  ofter  tlie  existence  of  evil  as  any 
objection  to  infinite  goodness.  Our  moral  constitution,  the 
light  of  nature  and  revelation,  teach  us  the  contrarj^;  both 
assure  us  that  God  is  good.  The  divine  benevolence  is  as 
boundless  as  the  divine  wisdom  and  power.  The  problem 
of  moral  and  physical  evil  need  not  trouble  a  single  mind; 
it  has  nothing  in  it  to  infringe  upon  the  goodness  of  God. 
Our  ignorance  is  the  sole  ground  of  our  mistakes.  We  are 
constantly  liable  to  overlook  the  greatest  good  in  an  inferior 
one.  God,  as  inlinite  in  his  perfections,  cannot  be  fully  com- 
prehended by  our  finite  minds, — finite  in  their  progress. 
This  only  we  know,  we  can  place  no  limit  to  the  pow^er  or 
to  the  goodness  of  God.  How  ungrateful  are  we  to  complain 
at  God's  works, — to  imagine  the  fish  should  be  elevated  to 
the  scale  of  quadrupeds,  quadrupeds  to  men,  and  men  to 
angels, — to  be  envious  because  some  are  more  learned,  or 
rich,  or  higher  in  the  scale  of  being  than  ourselves, — to  find 
fault,  not  with  our  want  of  virtue,  but  happiness, — to  think 
we  might  improve  upon  the  order  of  the  universe  !  How 
ungrateful  to  be  spying  out  always  the  evils,  and  never  to 
think  of  the  blessings !  Is  there  to  be  no  end  to  our 
captious  questions  ? 

But  these  questions  force  us  to  pass  beyond  the  limit 
of  human  agency  and  human  power,  and  lead  us  directly 
into  the  infinite  sphere  of  divine  power  and  benevolence. 
But  let  us  abstain  from  language  as  thankless  as  it  is  useless. 
Let  us  bow  before  the  infinite  mind.  Let  us  trust  in  the 
boundless  goodness  of  God.  Let  virtue  and  eternal  right  be 
the  end  of  our  being,  and  then  happiness,  such  as  God  only 
can  give,  shall  be  our  portion. 

Most  appropriately,  upon  the  permission  of  evil,  does  Ho- 
race Bushnell  remark :  "  So  far,  the  possibility  of  evil  ap- 
pears to  be  necessarily  involved  in  the  existence  of  a  realm 
of  powers ;  whether  it  shall  also  be  a  fact,  depends  on  other 
considerations  yet  to  be  named.  One  of  the  most  valued 
and  most  triumphantly  asserted  arguments  of  our  new  school 
of  sophists  is  dismissed  in  this  manner  at  the  outset.  God, 
they  say,  is  omnipotent,  and  being  omnipotent,  he  can,  of 


182  THE  PROBLEM  OF  PHYSICAL 

course,  do  all  things.  If,  therefore,  he  chooses  to  have  no 
sin,  or  disobedience,  there  will  be  no  sin  or  disobedience ; 
and  if  we  fall  on  what  is  sin  to  us,  it  will  only  be  a  form  of 
good  to  him,  and  would  be  also  to  us,  if  we  could  see  far 
enough  to  comprehend  the  good.  The  argument  is  well 
enough,  in  case  men  are  things  only  and  not  powers;  they 
are,  by  the  supposition,  to  act  as  being  uncaused  in  their 
action,  which  excludes  any  control  of  them  by  God's  om- 
nipotent force,  and  then  what  becomes  of  the  argument  ? 

"  But  it  will  be  peremptorily  required  of  us,  at  this  point, 
to  answer  another  question  ;  viz..  Why  God  should  have 
created  a  realm  of  powers,  or  free  agents,  if  they  must  needs 
be  capable,  in  this  manner,  of  wrong  and  misery  ?  Without 
acknowledging  for  one  moment  that  I  am  responsible  for  the 
answer  of  any  such  question,  and  denying  explicitly  the 
right  of  any  mortal  to  disallow  or  discredit  any  act  of  God, 
because  he  cannot  comprehend  the  reasons  of  it,  I  will 
simply  say  in  replj',  that  it  is  enough  for  me  to  be  allowed 
the  simple  hypothesis  that  God  preferred  to  have  powers  and 
not  things  only;  because  he  loves  character;  and  apart  from 
this,  cares  not  for  all  the  mere  things  that  can  be  piled  in 
the  infinitude  of  space  itself,  even  though  they  be  diamonds; 
because,  in  bestowing  on  a  creature  the  perilous  capacity  of 
character,  he  bestows  the  highest  possibility  of  wrath  and 
glory, — a  capacity  to  know,  to  love,  to  enjoy,  to  be  consciously 
great  and  blessed  in  the  participation  of  his  own  divinity  and 
character.  For  if  all  the  orbs  of  heaven  were  so  many  solid 
Kohinoors,  glittering  eternally  in  the  sun,  what  were  they 
either  to  themselves  or  to  him ;  or  if  they  should  roll  eter- 
nally, undisturbed  in  the  balance  of  their  attractions,  what 
were  they  to  each  other?  Is  it  any  impeachment  of  God 
that  he  did  not  care  to  reign  over  an  empire  of  stones  ?  If 
he  has  deliberately  chosen  a  kind  of  empire  not  to  be  ruled 
by  force;  if  he  has  deliberately  set  his  children  beyond  that 
kind  of  control,  that  they  ma}-  be  governed  by  truth,  reason, 
love,  want, fear,  and  the  like,  acting  through  their  consent; 
if  we  find  them  able  to  act  against  the  will  of  God,  as 
stones   and    vegetables    cannot,   what  more  is  necessary  to 


AND   MORAL   EVIL.  183 

vindicate  his  goodness  than  to  suggest  that  he  has  given 
them,  possibly,  a  capacity  to  break  allegiance,  in  order 
that  there  may  be  a  meaning  and  a  glory  in  allegiance, 
when  they  choose  it  ?  There  is,  then,  such  a  thing  in- 
herent in  the  system  of  powers  as  a  possibility  of  wrong ; 
for,  given  the  possibility  of  right,  we  have  the  possibility  of 
wvong." 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

THE  NATURAL  AND  THE  SUPERNATURAL. 

"  The  physical  or  immediate  cause  of  any  event,"  says  Prof. 
iN^ichol  on  the  solar  system,  "  is  merely  that  event  without 
which  as  a  precedent  the  other  never  occurs.  We  say  that 
one  event  causes  or  brings  about  another,  not  because  aught 
is  visible — any  peculiar  virtue  in  the  first  event  which  neces- 
sitates the  second — but  because  it  is  so  arranged  in  the 
economy  of  the  known  universe  that  when  the  first  happens 
the  second  always  follows  it ;  and  if  we  find  events  so  ordered, 
that  in  a  long  series  of  changes  they  succeed  each  other  in 
a  certain  recognizable  plan,  we  term  that  observed  plan  the 
law  of  these  events.  The  name,  or  word  law,  does  not  thus 
involve  the  idea  or  any  controlling  power:  it  is  the  mere  re- 
sult of  an  observed  succession, — the  mode  by  which  we  thread 
together  in  our  minds  the  different  events  which  befall;  and 
if  the  slightest  element  involving  control  is  properl}'  con- 
nected with  it,  it  can  only  be  in  reference  to  the  relation  of 
such  succession  to  spiritual  or  mental  phenomena,  and  ulti- 
mately as  it  represents  that  Idea  in  the  Almighty  mind 
according  to  which  the  order  in  question  was  arranged. 

"  Regarding  Law,  not  as  causative,  but  expressive, — as 
the  simple  indication  of  mighty  arrangements,  a  gleam  into 
the  finite  mind  from  that  of  the  Creator, — surely  the  farthest 
stretch  of  vision  which  man  can  ever  achieve  is  only  a  further 
disclosure  of  Almighty  glory  and  excellency." 

The  natural  is  peculiarly  the  sphere  of  the  development  of 
law  as  related  to  second  causes,  or  causes  dependent  for  their 
original  power  upon  the  First  Cause.  Now,  whether  this 
divine  power  is  every  instant  of  time  felt  energizing  all 
second  causes,  and  producing  effects  through  an  immediate 
(184) 


THE  NATURAL  AND    THE  SUPERNATURAL.      185 

interposition  of  force  in  all  cases,  or  whether  a  constitution 
is  given  under  the  name  of  nature  that  has  in  itself  a  power 
of  causality  distinct  from  the  First  Cause,  that  in  certain  sub- 
ordinate relations  may  be  said  as  restricted  to  this  constitu- 
tion to  be  developed  from  itself  alone,  yet  one  thing  is 
certain,  the  nature  of  everything  as  made  by  God  is  always 
developed  under  its  own  laws;  and  this  constitution,  be  it  that 
of  a  stone,  a  tree,  a  fish,  a  bird,  or  quadruped,  shows  itself 
under  natural  laws  specific  to  each  thing  or  creature,  and 
unfolding  itself  under  a  uniform  principle  of  order  and  ad- 
justment. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  this  regularity  in  all  natural  law  is  the 
foundation  of  all  the  securit3'and  happiness  of  creatures,  and 
why  all  liuman  reasoning  is  based  upon  it.  That  God  should 
give  a  constitution  to  everything  appropriate  for  the  end  for 
which  it  was  made,  might  easily  be  inferred  from  the  fact 
that  he  has  himself  a  nature,  and  that  nature  is  the  embodi- 
ment of  all  his  infinite  perfections.  A  correct  idea  of  nature 
and  its  laws,  as  related  to  creatures  or  anything  created, 
would  dissipate  the  common  illusion  that  regularity  was 
always  inconsistent  with  change,  and  uniformity  with  sus- 
pension. Nature  never  would  be  worshiped  as  the  cause  of 
all  things,  or  natural  law  deified  at  the  expense  of  its  maker. 

But  the  great  idea  to  consider  is  not  so  much  what  is  the 
constitution  of  nature,  or  what  are  its  laws,  as  what  is  the 
end  for  which  this  constitution  w^as  made, — what  lies  at  the 
foundation  of  all  these  processes  of  nature,  and  for  which 
they  were  instituted.  In  reply,  we  must  consider  that  all 
natural  law,  and  all  the  varieties  of  inanimate  or  animate  ex- 
istence, have  a  relation  to  one  grand  whole,  so  that  nothing 
exclusively  is  made  for  itself.  Thus,  nature  is  not  only  a 
process  of  development,  each  part  aiding  another,  and  all  in- 
terwoven together,  but  nature  has  for  its  end  the  shadowing 
forth  of  the  perfections  of  God  and  the  display  of  his  glory, 
be  it  in  inanimate  or  animate  creation.  No  other  end  on  the 
admission  of  a  God  is  possible  or  even  conceivable.  God 
must  be  in  himself  the  infinite  center  and  circumference  of  all 
existence, — all  thought,  all  wisdom,  power,  and  goodness, — 


186  THE  NATURAL  AND 

or  we  must  deny  the  fundamental  distinction  between  mind 
and  matter,  and  make  nature  and  its  laws  the  only  God  that 
has  a  being,  which  would  involve  pantheism  or  materialism. 
To  undertake  to  define  with  clearness  what  is  the  constitu- 
tion of  nature,  what  are  its  laws  and  their  relations  one  to 
another,  has  been  the  hopeless  effort  of  philosophers  in  all 
ages.  We  can  only  say  in  popular  language,  what  are  the 
obvious  phenomena  of  nature  ;  we  can  only  classify  its  opera- 
tions under  certain  general  laws ;  we  can  only  point  the  in- 
quirer into  its  secrets  to  a  few  of  the  outside  properties  of 
nature,  and  give  specific  names  to  each  uniform  diversity  of 
action ;  but  beyond  this,  the  highest,  even  as  the  feeblest,  in- 
telligence must  ever  be  in  the  dark. 

Evidence  most  overwhelming  is  given  to  us  to  show  that 
nature  is  not  God,  or  God  nature;  and  when  we  have  arrived 
at  the  most  obvious  of  all  truths,  that  there  is  a  God  inde- 
pendent of  nature,  its  author  and  preserver,  then  the  most 
sensible  of  all  inquiries  must  be,  for  what  is  nature  made? 
What  are  the  phenomena  of  its  existence  ?  How  are  they 
developed,  and  what  that  individual  and  universal  process 
which  limit  its  operations  ?  It  is  not  difficult  to  reply  to 
such  questions.  Nature,  as  the  workmanship  of  God,  must 
have  a  certain  constitution,  must  develop  itself  under  certain 
laws ;  those  laws  must  have  enstamped  the  impress  of  uni- 
formit}',  of  a  regular  process,  of  like  effects  following  like 
causes,  of  invariabilit}'  of  action  under  similar  circumstances, 
of  constant  manifestation  under  its  appropriate  conditions. 
But  when  the  question  is  asked,  must  there  never  be  any  de- 
viation ?  must  God  never  act  above  his  natural  laws,  or  give 
a  new  power,  or  impose  new  relations,  or  institute  new  con- 
ditions of  development,  or  supersede  these  laws,  or  act  in 
direct  opposition  to  them?  This  can  only  be  answered  by 
saj'ing,  that  if  there  was  a  time  when  nature  was  not,  if  a 
period  did  exist  when  its  laws  had  no  being,  if  evidence  con- 
clusive does  show  that  nature  itself  is  but  a  process  of  devel- 
opment, and,  following  the  law  of  the  separate  parts  that  go 
to  make  it  up,  has  revealed  a  birth,  a  maturity,  and  decline, 
then  in  the  process  of  ages  the  grand  whole  may  and  will 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  187 

reach  that  stage  where  a  total  change  shall  pass  over  its  ex- 
istence, and  new  laws  and  a  new  nature  shall  take  the  place 
of  the  old. 

In  confirmation  of  this,  science  and  revelation  both  agree  ; 
XhQy  both  point  to  the  preadamite  ages  of  the  world,  to  the 
evening  and  morning  of  those  six  days  of  creation,  enstamp- 
ing  on  all  material  things  the  great  law  of  jjrocess,  and 
disabusing  the  mind  of  an  endless  perpetuity  to  any  existing 
manifestation  of  nature.  The  supernatural  is  peculiarly  con- 
sistent with  the  past  history  of  this  earth  ;  it  is  absolutely 
essential  whenever  a  new  epoch  of  development  comes  into 
existence.  It  is  impossible  to  argue  from  the  existing  regu- 
larity of  nature's  laws,  that  always  this  has  been  so,  or  that 
never  it  will  cease  to  be  as  it  is.  We  have  the  records  of 
science  and  revelation  to  show  that  there  was  a  time  when 
the  great  fabric  of  nature,  including  our  earth  and  its  in- 
habitants, was  first  put  up  ;  when  new  laws  came  in  to  carry 
out  new  adjustments  and  conditions  ;  when  a  new  process  was 
evolved  from  a  pre-existent  state,  and  nature  put  on  a  new 
raiment;  when  life  sprang  from  death,  order  from  confusion, 
and  beauty  from  deformity. 

The  question  then  presents  itself,  is  there  anything  more 
than  the  natural?  is  the  supernatural  inconsistent  with  just 
ideas  of  God  or  nature?  i^ot  if  past  history  teaches  the  con- 
trary ;  not  if  the  great  end  of  creation  must  be  to  manifest 
the  perfections  of  God  ;  not  if  the  light  we  can  gather  from 
an  investigation  of  nature,  and  the  declarations  of  revelation 
show  that  there  are  times  when  either  nature  must  be  created 
or  made  anew,  or  there  be  interposed  laws  other  and  higher 
than  any  now  existing. 

Most  appropriatel}'  does  Professor  George  Fisher  remark  : 
"  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  powerful  tendency  to  panthe- 
istic modes  of  thought  is  rife  at  the  present  day.  The  popu 
lar  literature,  even  in  our  country,  is  far  more  widely  infected 
in  this  way  than  unobservant  readers  are  aware.  The  laws 
of  nature  are  hypostasized, — spoken  of  as  if  they  were  a  self- 
active  being;  and  not  unfrequently  the  same  tendency  leads 
to  the  virtual,  if  not  explicit,  denial  of  the  free  and  responsi- 


188  THE  NATURAL  AND 

ble  nature  of  man.  History  is  resolved  by  a  class  of  writers 
into  the  movement  of  a  great  macliine, — into  the  revolution 
of  events  with  which  the  free  will  neither  of  God  nor  of  man 
has  any  connection. 

"  We  are  thus  brought  back  in  our  analysis  of  the  contro- 
versy with  the  existing  unbelief  to  the  postulates  of  natural 
religion.  On  these  the  Christian  apologist  forms  the  pre- 
sumption or  anterior  probability  that  a  revelation  will  be 
given.  It  is  more  and  more  apparent  that  the  cause  of  natural 
religion  and  that  of  revealed  religion  are  bound  up  together. 
But  the  native  convictions  of  the  human  mind  concerning 
God  and  duty  cannot  be  permanently  destroj^ed.  Atheism 
is  an  affront  alike  to  the  inquiring  reason  and  the  uplooking 
soul  of  man.  Pantheism  mocks  his  religious  nature.  It  is 
inconsistent  with  religion,  with  prayer,  with  worship, — with 
that  communion  with  a  higher  Being,  which  is  religion.  It 
is  inconsistent  also  with  morality  in  any  earnest  meaning 
of  the  term :  for  it  empties  free  will  and  responsibilit}^, 
holiness  and  sin,  of  their  meaning.  Every  one  who  acknowl- 
edges the  feeling  of  guilt  to  be  a  reality  and  to  represent  the 
truth,  and  every  one  who  blames  the  conduct  of  another  in 
the  very  act,  denies  the  pantheistic  theory.  Conscience  must 
prove  in  the  long  run  stronger  than  any  speculation,  no 
matter  how  plausible.  In  the  soul  itself,  then,  in  its  aspira- 
tion after  the  living  God,  and  its  conviction  of  freedom  and 
of  sin,  there  is  erected  an  everlasting  barrier  against  the  in- 
roads of  false  philosophy,  and  one  that  will  be  found  to  em- 
brace within  the  shelter  of  its  walls  the  cause  of  Christianity 
itself." 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  nature  and  its  laws  do  not  con- 
flict with  the  development  of  the  supernatural,  for  nature  is 
the  result  of  the  divine  workmanship,  and  natural  law  origin- 
ates from  the  constitution  God  imparts  to  nature.  Panthe- 
ism and  materialism  both  are  based  upon  the  deilication  of 
nature  and  shutting  out  God  from  his  works.  Natural  law, 
if  either  is  true,  must  resolve  itself  into  an  unyielding  fatality, 
and  the  utter  denial  of  the  supernatural.  But  admit  the  per- 
sonality of  God,  the  fact  that  nature  is  only  the  work  of  his 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  189 

hands,  and  then  the  inference  is  inevitable  that  the  constitu- 
tion that  he  has  given  to  it  must  be  such  that  nature  in  its 
totahty  will  as  certainly  pass  through  a  change  involving  the 
necessity  of  the  supernatural,  as  that  any  of  its  parts  have  a 
birth,  maturity,  and  decline.  If  the  end  for  which  nature 
was  made  is  to  show  forth  the  perfections  of  God,  it  must 
appear  to  the  last  degree  improbable  that  an  eternity  would 
be  given  to  it  of  the  undeviating  operation  of  natural  law, 
and  that  no  principle  of  change  should  be  enstamped  upon 
the  works  of  God.  It  is  the  very  fact  that  this  uniformity  is 
broken  in  upon,  that  undeviating  regularity  has  its  prescribed 
bounds,  that  natural  law  has  its  limits,  that  gives  the  highest 
proof  of  a  power  above  nature,  which  makes  nature  the  ser- 
vant and  not  the  master;  because  God  does  interpose  at 
times,  and  gives  a  new  nature,  and  new  development  of  law, 
and  new  relations  and  conditions  of  life;  because  he  does 
show  that  there  is  a  birth,  maturity,  and  decline,  and  that 
when  the  time  comes  nature  itself  must  die  without  super- 
natural intervention,  that  God  shows  that  the  throne  of  do- 
minion is  restricted  to  himself  alone.  But  suppose  this 
was  not  so,  suppose  nature  had  its  eternal  circuit  of  uni- 
formity, suppose  natural  law  never  was  broken  in  upon,  and 
all  this  visible  earth,  and  sun,  and  moon,  all  this  universal 
nature  existed  under  an  inflexible  and  eternal  type  of  devel- 
opment, going  round  its  endless  circle  of  causality  with  no 
forces  emerging  but  those  evolved  in  the  ages  of  the  past, 
how  certain  the  inference  that  nature  must  be  God,  or  above 
God! 

Here  we  see  the  necessity  of  the  supernatural.  It  is  the 
great  principle  manifested  in  Providence,  shownng  the  de- 
pendence of  the  creature  upon  the  Creator,  and  that  the  world 
is  not  a  machine,  having  in  itself  wheels  of  perpetual  move- 
ment. Take  the  idea  of  the  supernatural  away,  and  nature 
is  reduced  to  a  clock  which,  once  wound  up,  runs  forever. 
Thus,  as  we  study  the  constitution  of  nature,  we  are  im- 
pressed with  the  fact,  ever  growing  in  importance,  that  over 
and  above  the  first  setting  in  motion  the  machinery  of  the 
universe,  there   must  be  an  ever-present  power,  above  all 


190  THE  NATURAL  AND 

second  causes,  that  superintends  every  instant  the  compli- 
cated forces  of  universal  nature,  adjusting,  regulating,  direct- 
ing and  restraining,  giving  to  each  part  its  respective  limit, 
and  combining  the  whole  in  one  universal  harmony.  It  is  in 
this  way  that  alone  we  can  solve  the  great  problem  of  the 
preservation  of  the  universe,  or  account  for  the  harmonious 
adjustment  of  those  laws  that  in  other  respects  would  involve 
inextricable  confusion; 

Without  entering  into  the  investigation  of  the  scriptural 
meaning  of  the  six  days  of  creation, — as  this  more  properly 
comes  under  the  department  of  revealed  theology, — it  is  only 
needful  to  say  that  all  history  and  science  confirm  this  won- 
derful record  of  the  preadamite  ages.  The  evening  and  the 
morning  distinctly  teach  us  of  two  different  states  of  exist- 
ence, and  foreshadow  in  each  of  the  six  great  epochs  of  crea- 
tion the  intervention  of  the  supernatural  to  give  a  higher  type 
of  being  to  our  earth. 

Most  appropriately  does  Professor  Tayler  Lewis,  in  his 
work  on  the  six  days  of  creation,  remark:  "As  surely  as 
there  is  written  on  the  rocks  the  long  working  of  regular, 
uninterrupted  laws  or  methods,  in  which  each  step  or  stage 
seems  to  come  out  of  what  went  before,  and  to  have  given 
birth  to  what  comes  after  (for  this  is  the  only  consistent 
meaning  we  can  attach  to  the  word  natural,)  so  surely  is 
there  found  another  record  as  strangely,  and  we  may  even 
say  more  unmistakably,  engraved.  From  a  higher  world 
than  the  natural  there  must  have  been  from  time  to  time  a 
sudden  flashing  in  of  the  extraordinary,  of  the  supernatural, 
of  a  new  morning  after  the  long  night  of  nature;  or,  in  other 
words,  the  divine  power  introducing,  or  bringing  out,  if  any 
prefer  the  term,  a  new  element,  a  new  force,  a  new  law,  a 
new  idea,  call  it  what  you  will,  accompanied  with  new 
methods,  or  laws  for  its  subsequent  growth  or  development, 
and  then  leaving  it  to  their  undisturbed  operation." 

This  is  precisely  the  idea  we  have  of  the  great  distinction 
existing  between  the  supernatural  and  the  natural,  which  is 
found  enstamped  on  the  records  of  all  history  and  all  science. 
To  conceive  that  an  infinitely  wise,  powerful,  and  benevolent 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  191 

God  would  give  up  to  nature  all  that  which  would  peculiarly 
mark  his  own  existence  as  independent  and  above  nature, 
even  as  controlling  it,  is  impossible.  To  believe  this,  a  man 
must  shut  his  eyes  to  every  good  argument  addressed  to  the 
understanding,  and  be  willfully  blind  to  the  clearest  facts  of 
history.  The  great  reason  for  the  supernatural  lies  in  the 
necessity  of  revealing  to  all  moral  agents  that  God  has  nature 
under  his  perfect  control,  that  he  acts  according  to  his  own 
will,  and  cannot  be  confined  in  his  movements  to  the  sphere 
of  any  natural  law.  To  limit  himself  to  this  would  be  to 
hide  the  most  sensible  evidence  of  his  personality  and  infinite 
superiority  to  nature,  for  nature  is  not,  and  cannot  be,  a  self- 
perpetuating  machine  with  no  end.  There  is  enstamped  on 
all  natures  an  inherent  law  of  birth,  maturity,  and  decline. 
It  is  seen  in  all  vegetation,  all  animal  existence;  and  if  we 
carry  the  analogy  into  the  history  of  nations  as  individuals, 
we  see  there  also  a  process  of  infancy,  growth,  manhood,  and 
decline;  and  could  we  measure  the  ages  of  inanimate  exist- 
ence, of  the  solid  earth  and  planets,  as  we  do  the  days  of  our 
sun-measured  lives,  through  the  whole  physical  universe  there 
would  be  seen  a  mighty  cyclical  law  pervading,  and  making 
out  as  distinctly  a  limit  to  movement  in  time  as  there  is  en- 
stamped  a  limit  in  extension.  Space  would  no  more  certainly 
have  its  boundary  in  the  creation  of  worlds  than  time  its 
limit  in  their  existence.  As  the  natural  was  never  made  to 
boast  of  an  infinity  of  creations,  so  also  it  cannot  an  eternity 
of  duration.  An  inherent  necessity  must  be  in  nature  to  die 
out,  or  the  supernatural  never  could  reveal  itself  in  its  glory. 
Nature  must  have  its  constitution  from  God,  and  that  consti- 
tution must  teach  the  great  lesson  of  its  infinite  inferiority  to 
its  author.  But  how  teach  this  lesson,  except  by  a  vivid 
contrast  with  him ;  how  teach  it  unless  it  bears  the  impress 
of  subordination  and  dependence  ?  God  is  unchangeable,  in- 
finite, and  eternal.  Nature  must  be  changeable,  finite,  and 
limited.  It  must  spring  from  the  supernatural,  be  controlled 
by  it,  and  find  its  limit  in  it.  Consequently,  natural  law, 
while  it  must  be  a  rule  to  the  creature,  can  be  no  rule  to 
the  Creator.     God  holds  it  in  his  hands  as  the  charioteer 


192  THE  NATURAL  AND 

the  reins  of  his  fleet  steeds,  and  while  he  permits  them  to  run 
in  their  appointed  course,  he  yet  controls  those  instruments 
which  otherwise  would  bring  ruin  upon  all.  If,  then,  as  far 
as  our  experience  and  observation  go,  as  far  as  the  teachings 
of  science  and  history  extend,  we  find  no  exception  to  that 
cj'clical  law  that  limits  with  equal  certainty  the  age  of  the 
forest  leaf  as  the  monarch  that  roams  the  desert,  the  flower  of 
the  field  as  the  life  of  man,  the  insect  of  a  day  as  the  oak  of 
centuries,  why  should  we  hesitate  to  believe  that  the  world 
may  die  out  as  certainly  as  the  creatures  that  inhabit  it  ?  Why 
should  we  refuse  to  credit  the  old  age  of  the  future,  as  we  are 
compelled  to  confess  that  of  the  past  ?  All  this  may  be  true, 
and  yet  a  higher  stage  of  existence  be  superinduced  upon 
that  which  has  ceased  to  be.  A  nobler  life  may  be  evolved 
from  that  life  which  is  quenched  in  death.  The  naturalist 
alone  must  find  everything  to  discourage  him ;  he  never 
looks  upon  nature,  however  fair,  but  that  he  reads  in  every 
lineament  the  revolving  wheel  of  birth  and  death.  Not  one 
of  the  vegetable  or  animal  creation  is  an  exception  :  he  rushes 
for  consolation  to  the  solid  earth ;  he  welcomes  inanimate  na- 
ture ;  he  says,  here  is  the  changeless,  the  immutable,  the 
eternal ;  here  are  laws  whose  uniformity  is  never  broken  in 
upon  ;  here  are  the  ages  that  roll  on  in  an  undying  regu- 
larity ;  but,  as  he  explores  the  buried-up  archives  of  land 
and  sea  and  rock,  as  he  climbs  the  mountains  or  goes  down 
into  the  deep  caverns,  he  finds  the  extinct  remains  of  species 
of  animals  that  speak  of  a  condition  totally  unlike  the  pres- 
ent; he  finds  proof  of  a  pre-existing  condition  where  even 
the  denizens  of  the  land  could  not  live ;  beyond  this  he  goes 
where  air  and  water  could  have  no  inhabitants,  and  ages  be- 
yond he  sees  a  condition  where  all  must  be  chaos  and  night. 
"Why,  then,  should  he  infer  that  the  present  is  more  perma- 
nent than  the  past;  that  the  supernatural,  so  essential  in  ages 
that  have  gone  by,  may  not  be  equally  as  desirable  in  the 
ages  to  come  ? 

This  is  peculiarly  evident  when  we  consider  that  natural 
law  only  expresses  the  law  of  a  part  of  nature, — that  nature 
is  made  up  of  an  endless  variety  of  things,  and  that  each  of 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  193 

the  immberless  parts  of  nature  has  its  own  law,  and  can  only 
exist  by  a  proper  adjustment  to  the  whole.  So  when  natural 
law  is  spoken  of,  the  question  must  always  arise,  What  law?  Is 
it  the  law  of  the  atmosphere,  of  heat,  of  gravitation,  of  chemi- 
cal combination,  of  vegetation,  of  animal  growth,  or  of  any 
thing  else?  Now,  the  word  nature  simply  means  the  present 
constitution  of  things  with  all  its  variety  of  laws ;  and  to 
speak  of  this  constitution  as  eternal  and  its  laws  as  change- 
less, is  to  belie  all  history  and  science  as  a  fact,  without  any 
attempt  at  explanation.  We  know  that  supernatural  inter- 
vention has  alwaj's  marked  the  ages  of  the  world.  The  very 
end  for  which  the  world  was  made,  for  which  its  varied  in- 
habitants were  created,  reveals  the  great  fact  that  nature 
has  enstamped  upon  it  a  higher  impress  than  that  Avhich 
secures  its  present  action.  The  wliole  follows  the  same 
law  that  is  the  condition  of  the  individual  parts.  The 
circle  of  existence  is  no  more  endless  than  the  process  of  de- 
velopment,— the  finite  is  as  true  in  duration  as  the  limit 
of  worlds  in  space.  A  higher  power  must  intervene  to  give 
a  new  impulse  to  the  worn-out  machinery  of  natural  law  ; 
must  impart  to  the  old  nature  a  new  power;  must  bring  it 
under  new  conditions,  and  place  it  upon  a  nobler  scale  of  de- 
velopment. When  the  time-piece  of  the  old  world  runs 
down,  then  another  supernatural  intervention  must  wind  it 
up,  and  from  the  ruin  of  the  past  evolve  a  better  creation. 

"  The  position  we  have  reached,"  says  Professor  Tayler 
Lewis,  "is  that  all  natures — lesser  natures,  greater  natures, 
specific  natures,  general  natures,  the  one  universal  nature — 
have  all  one  law  of  growth,  maximum,  decline,  ortus,  transihis, 
interitus;  and  that  if  one  outlives  one  or  more  revolutions,  it 
is  only  to  go  round  in  a  similar  cycle,  with  a  corresponding 
law  of  decrease  at  each  repetition.  In  other  words,  the 
cyclical  law  is  the  law  of  all  natures,  or,  as  we  might  say,  the 
nature  of  all  natures.  If  we  are  not  satisfied  with  any  attempted 
a 'priori  ^YOoi\  there  is  the  inductive,  or  a  jjosteriori  avgnvaeut 
derived  from  experience.  This  may  be  very  limited,  but  it 
knows  of  no  exceptions.  It  is  decidedly  against  the  doctrine 
of  any  etenial  progress  severed  from  the  idea  of  the  super- 


194  THE  NATURAL  AND 

natural,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  from  'the  things  that  are 
seen;'  this  is  the  process  of  all  natures.  They  all  repeat 
themselves,  they  all  have  a  tendency  to  run  out.  We  see  it 
everywhere  in  the  natural  world.  We  discover  it,  more- 
over, in  existences  of  a  higher  character,  which,  although 
not  strictly  belonging  to  the  physical  in  their  essence,  have 
their  manifestation  in  connection  with  it.  We  trace  it  to 
some  extent  in  the  moral  world,  in  social  and  political 
systems,  in  psychological  developments,  in  intellectual  and 
literary  periods.  These,  too,  have  their  growth,  maximum, 
decline.  A  nation  has  its  birth,  youth,  manhood,  and  old 
age.  What  we  call  the  'age,'  too,  presents  often  the  same 
manifestation.  But  in  nature,  strictly,  as  far  as  our  observation 
can  extend,  there  are  no  exceptions, — none  that  are  such,  even 
in  appearance.  Some  of  the  periods  are  but  for  moments, — 
that  is,  moments  in  our  modes  of  estimation, — some  are  for 
hours,  some  for  days,  for  seasons,  for  years,  for  ages;  but  in 
all  the  same  cyclical  law  reigns  predominant.  Each  has  its 
birth,  its  youth,  its  age,  its  perfection,  and  its  imperfection,  its 
growth,  its  decay,  its  reviviscence,  its  winter,  its  spring,  its 
evening  of  torpor  and  repose,  its  new  morning,  when,  like  the 
sun  in  its  circuit,  it  again  sets  out  to  run  its  appointed  round 
as  one  of  the  lesser  wheels  in  the  Gilgal  Toledeth,  or  the 
great  wheel  of  the  universal  nature. 

"  Unless,  therefore,  the  Scripture  expressly  contradicts,  we 
cannot  resist  the  conviction  that  would  convey  this  analogy 
from  the  lowest  to  the  highest  manifestation  in  the  physical 
universe.  As  we  go  back  from  solar  days  to  seasons,  from 
seasons  to  years,  from  years  to  lesser  times  of  plants  and  ani- 
mals, from  these  to  ages  that  witness  the  growth  and  decline 
of  species  and  genera,  we  cannot  reject  the  thought  that  there 
are  still  higher  (i«^s,  and  seasons,  and  years.  God  and  nature 
cannot  be  supposed  to  stop  short  with  our  sense,  and  our  his- 
tory, and  our  inductions.  The  ever-widening  spiral  carries 
us  upward  to  the  ages  of  ages — the  aiw^^a^  tmv  aluj'^w^ — pos- 
sessed of  the  same  cyclical  character,  and  during  which  God 
employed  the  same  cyclical  law  in  the  production  of  worlds, 
and  Scripture  does  not  forbid  it.     To  one  who  will  read  it 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  195 

aright,  the  whole  aspect  of  the  sublime  account  in  Genesis  is 
consistent  alone  with  such  a  view,  while  it  is  greatly  aided  by 
those  remarkable  expressions  in  other  parts  of  the  Bible, 
where  the  utmost  power  of  language  seems  taxed  to  convey 
one,  the  idea  of  the  vast  duration  of  God's  kingdom  (his  visible 
outward  dynamical  kingdom)  in  the  ages  that  preceded  the 
growth  of  our  world  as  well  as  in  those  that  are  to  come. 
From  all  this  we  infer  not  only  the  fact,  but  the  absolute  ne- 
cessity, of  repeated  creative  or  supernatural  acts ;  and  this  not 
only  to  raise  nature  from  time  to  time  to  a  higher  degree, 
but  to  arouse  and  rescue  her  from  that  apparent  death  into 
which,  when  left  to  herself,  she  must  ever  fall.  The  super- 
natural becomes  the  originator  of  a  new  nature,  or  the  re- 
storer and  vivifier  of  an  old ;  but  this,  too,  in  time  runs  out,  or 
tends  to  run  out.  There  comes  again  the  evening,  the  win- 
ter, the  period  of  growing  torpor,  from  which  a  new  creative 
word  alone  can  recall  the  dying  c^'cle ;  and  hence  the  neces- 
sity of  such  word,  not  only  to  the  higher  progress,  but  to  the 
very  existence,  of  the  universe.  So  also  in  the  moral  world. 
Here,  too,  we  trace  a  similar  analogy,  if  not  the  same  law. 
In  the  moral  as  well  as  the  physical  kingdom,  there  is  extraor- 
dinary manifestation,  the  new  life,  the  powerful  growth,  the 
apparent  decay,  and  then  the  long  reign  of  ordinary  moral 
causes,  until,  when  the  spiritual  seems  almost  sunk  in  the 
natural,  God  comes  forth  from  the  'hiding-place  of  his 
power,'  and  there  is  a  new  exhibition  of  the  supernatural 
word  and  supernatural  grace,  reviving  everything  from  its 
night  of  torpor  and  decay.  It  is  something  more  than  a 
metaphor  when  such  reviviscences  are  styled  a  morning,  and 
the  period  they  usher  in,«  day, — a  day  of  light,  a  day  of  life, 
a  day  of  power,  a  day  of  the  right  hand  of  the  Most  High. 
Such  days  as,  we  may  yet  expect,  are  coming  upon  the  Church 
and  the  world." 

So  full  of  importance  is  this  forcible  presentation  of  a  sub- 
ject that  must  ever  involve  the  deepest  mystery,  that  the  mind 
naturally  lingers  long  in  the  contemplation  of  those  ages  that 
have  called  forth,  and  always  will  call  forth,  the  highest  inter- 
position of  the  supernatural  ;  and  the  question  ai'ises.  Why, 


196  THE  NATURAL  AND 

wlien  a  line  is  so  distinctly  drawn  between  God  and  liis 
works,  nature  and  its  author,  the  law  of  the  natural  and  the 
supernatural,  is  there  room  in  the  human  mind  at  all  for  the 
vagaries  of  pantheism  and  materialism,  or  the  degrading 
systems  of  heathen  superstition  ?  Why  does  human  philos- 
ophy carry  with  it  so  much  the  impress  of  ungodliness,  and 
tend  so  universally  to  the  denial  of  God,  or  the  removing 
him  from  his  works  ?  If  humanity  was  sinless,  would  not  the 
tendency  be  as  natural  to  view  God  in  his  works  as  that  of 
the  law  of  heat  to  expand  ?  But  considering  the  universal 
friction  of  sin,  are  we  not  compelled  to  admit  that  the  moral 
disease  that  blinds  the  mind  and  hardens  the  heart  is  the 
real  solution  to  those  difhculties  that  are  presented  in  human 
belief  and  practice  ? 

Arnold  has  well  remarked,  in  one  of  his  sermons,  "  The 
clearest  notion  which  can  be  given  of  rationalism  would,  I 
think,  be  this,  that  it  is  the  abuse  of  the  understanding  in 
subjects  where  the  divine  and  human,  so  to  speak,  are  inter- 
mingled. Of  human  things  the  understanding  can  judge,  of 
divine  things  it  cannot;  and  thus,  where  the  two  are  mixed 
together,  its  inability  to  judge  of  the  one  part  makes  it  de- 
range the  proportions  of  both,  and  the  judgment  of  the  whole 
is  vitiated.  For  example,  the  understanding  examines  a  mi- 
raculous history:  it  judges  truly  what  I  may  call  the  human 
part  of  the  case, — that  is  to  say,  of  the  rarity  of  miracles,  of 
the  fallibility  of  human  testimony,  of  the  proneness  of  most 
minds  to  exaggeration,  and  of  the  critical  arguments  aftecting 
the  genuineness  or  date  of  the  narrative  itself.  But  it  for- 
gets the  divine  part,  namely,  the  power  and  providence  of 
God,  that  he  is  really  ever  present  among  us,  and  that  the 
spiritual  world  which  exists  invisibly  all  around  us,  may  con- 
ceivably and  by  no  means  impossibly  exist  at  some  times,  and 
to  some  persons,  even  visibly." 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  the  admission  of  a  personal  God 
brings  with  it  the  admission  of  nature  dependent  upon  him, 
brings  with  it  the  reasonableness  of  the  supernatural,  and  in- 
volves its  development  in  accordance  with  no  other  law  than 
simply  the  will  of  the  Creator,  a  power  put  forth  that  can  be 


THE   SUPERNATURAL.  197 

shown  ouly  by  the  simple  fact,  and  which  will  ever  in  its 
philosophy  elude  the  highest  researches  of  the  human  mind. 

Revealed  theology  comes  to  us  presupposing  the  great 
truths  of  natural  theology.  It  enters  into  no  proof  of  the  ex- 
istence of  God,  of  creation,  of  conscience,  of  the  fall,  of  hu- 
man sinfulness.  These  are  the  very  foundations  upon  which 
it  builds ;  they  are  the  axioms,  self-evident,  universally  ac- 
knowledged, of  all  divine  theology;  the}^  form  the  admitted 
propositions,  felt  and  seen,  and  known  to  be  never  denied 
with  the  shadow  of  reason  ;  and  yet  while  denied  they  can 
only  be  through  an  agency  and  cause  that  has  its  very  seat 
in  the  perversion,  the  prostitution,  and,  if  possible,  the  abne- 
gation of  an  element  inhuman  nature  that  God  has  placed  as 
the  first  and  last  witness  of  himself,  even  the  conscience. 

If  the  question  is  asked,  Why  is  revealed  theology  denied  ? 
the  answer  must  be  found  in  the  fact  that  some,  if  not  all  of 
the  axioms  of  natural  theology  are  forgotten,  ignored,  or 
positively  rejected.  It  has  been  our  object  to  show  that  the 
natural,  which  is  the  sphere  especially  of  second  causes,  must 
involve  the  supernatural  in  some  way.  God  must  be  the 
First  Cause  of  nature,  and  the  parts  which  go  to  make  it  up 
must  intimately  depend  upon  him.  "  Man  uses  machinery," 
says  G.  Cummings,  "  a  lever  to  move  a  weight — but  we  do 
not  consider  the  power  as  in  the  machinery  or  the  lever;  as 
in  this  instance  the  machinery  does  not  render  unnecessary 
the  agency  of  man,  so  do  not  secondary  causes  exclude  the 
agency  of  God." 

Our  idea,  then,  of  all  secondary  causes,  is  simply  that  in  the 
world  of  matter  the  action  is  ah  extra.,  while  in  the  spiritual 
world  it  is  ab  intra.  Matter  has  its  principle  of  movement 
from  without,  mind  from  within.  The  constitution  of  nature, 
in  relation  to  both  mind  and  matter,  will,  therefore,  be  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  law  of  each,  except  in  those  cases  where 
all  natural  law  is  suspended,  or  superseded,  or  made  to  give 
way  to  another  and  totally  different  law.  What  that  law  will 
be  can  only  be  decided  in  the  mind  of  God  himself.  There 
are  innumerable  cases  where  the  supernatural  is  simply  above 
all  natural  law,  where  it  means  only  a  new  force  that  is  in- 


198  THE  NATURAL  AND 

fused  into  the  old  law,  a  new  energy  that  gives  higher  efH- 
cienej  to  the  natural,  and  enables  it  to  accomplish  what 
otherwise  it  would  not. 

Tljen,  again,  the   supernatural  nvny  assume  the  type  of 
originating  matter,  introducing  substances  and  their  laws  that 
never  before  existed,  as  when  the  first  matter  was  made,  or 
the  first  man.     These  all  comprehend  a  distinct  and  perfectly 
dift'erent  application  of  power  from  that  which  subsequently 
is  manifested.     Then,  again,  the  supernatural  may  be  seen 
acting  in  direct  opposition  to  existing   laws,  and  producing 
effects  not  only  above  all  natural  laws,  but  setting  them  alto- 
gether aside,  as  in  raising  tlje  dead  to  life.     The  type  of  the 
supernatural  in  relation  to  mind    and  matter,  may  have  as 
varied  an  application  as  that  manifested  in  mitural  laws.     It 
may  be  concealed  in  its  operation,  with  difficulty  discrimi- 
nated from  the  known  operation  of  nature,  or  it  may  be  as 
obvious  as  the  lightning  flash,  and  compelling  conviction  of 
the  direct  agency  of  God  in  the  dullest  intellect.     Especially 
in  relation   to   mind  the  supernatural  may  be,  and  often  is, 
more  concealed,  for  mind  presents  a  profounder  depth   of 
mystery  even    than  matter,  and  therefore  where    most  un- 
known there  may  be  most  frequent  the  direct  agenc}'  of  God. 
And  yet  the  view  we  entertain  of  the  supernatural,  and  its 
frequent  occurrence  when  concealed,  does  not  conflict  witli 
the  exercise  of  man's  free  moral  agency,  or  make  impossible 
the  freedom  of  human  volition  with  the  existence  of  second 
causes.     The  law  of  the  mind  and  that  of  matter  are  totally 
distinct  in  this  respect, — that  matter  is  passive  and  must  be 
acted  upon,  the  force  applied  must  be  from  without,  while 
mind  acts  from  within,  is  self-caused,  and  therefore  can,  in  per- 
fect consistency  with  the  supernatural,  have  connected  with 
it  the  element  of  individuality,  of  voluntariness,  and  free- 
dom.    It  therefore  exists  under  limitations,  but  not  the  limit- 
ations of  matter.     As  originating  from  the  First  Cause,  it 
must  be  dependent  upon  it,  and  yet  that  dependence  be  such 
as  to  exalt  it  to  the  highest  stage  of  moral  responsibility,  and 
bring  reward  or  its  o})posite. 

Here,  then,  we  see  nature  under  innumerable  modes  of  man- 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  199 

ifestation,  and  expressive  of  substances  totally  distinct,  each 
having^  their  own  laws,  and  each  in  their  existence  and  dura- 
tion  bounded  bj'  the  law  that  existis  in  the  divine  mind.  We 
follow  on  the  great  chain  of  causation,  and  we  reach  finally 
the  last  link  that  is  upheld  by  the  hand  of  God.  The  super- 
natural is  above,  below,  within,  and  around  the  natural.  As 
we  resolve  the  forces  of  nature  into  their  simplest  elements, 
we  find  behind  them  all  more  recondite  forces  that  have 
eluded  our  investigation;  we  go  deeper  and  deeper  still  into 
our  analj'sis  of  the  causes  that  keep  the  wheels  of  life  in  mo- 
tion, or  in  the  inanimate  creation  we  submit  to  chemical  law 
the  ditierent  substances  of  nature ;  and  yet  the  uiost  subtle 
processes  of  the  chemist  teach  us  the  great  lesson  that  there 
are  causes  at  work,  bound  up  in  elements,  that  can  never  be 
analyzed  or  understood.  One  thing,  however,  we  do  know, 
that  no  inconsistency  would  be  so  great,  no  absurdity  so  mani- 
fest, as  to  confound  the  natural  and  the  supernatural  in  the 
same  thing. 

Most  appropriately  does  Professor  Tayler  Lewis  remark, 
"  If  any  one  ask,  Why  does  God  Avork  in  this  way  ?  What 
"need  has  he  of  natures?  we  can  onl}-  sa}',  '  So  it  seemeth  good 
in  his  sight.'  He  could  doubtless  have  made  all  things  dif- 
ferenth',  but  then  we  know  it  would  not  have  been  the  best 
way,  because  he  has  not  adopted  it.  He  works  through  na- 
ture, or  a  succession  of  natures,  no  one  developing  another, 
yet  each  pre})aring  the  way  for  the  one  that  is  to  succeed. 
We  see  enough  of  the  universe  to  know  that  this  is  the 
method,  and,  thus  considered,  the  general  view  is  unaffected 
by  the  measures  of  duration.  It  is  of  no  importance  to  the 
argument  whether  the  flow  seems  more  or  less  rapid  as 
viewed  from  our  stand-point,  or  as  measured  b}'  the  shorter 
periods  of  that  exactly  divided  physical  sj-stem  to  which  our 
thinking,  that  is,  our  flow  of  ideas,  has  become  confirmed.  It 
is  still  the  great  principle,  whether  it  appears  in  the  growth 
of  the  fungus,  the  '  son  of  a  night,'  in  the  growth  of  the  plant 
that  lives  for  years,  in  the  growth  of  a  tree  that  endures  for 
centuries,  in  the  growth  of  worlds  whose  cyclical  law  extends 
through  ?eons  of  ages,  embracing  a  duration  equal  perhajis  to 


200  THE  NATURAL   AND 

millennial  or  millions  of  niilleiinial  recurrences  of  such  cycles 
as  are  made  by  our  exact  sun-measured  years.  It  is  the  great 
principle  for  which  we  contend;  and,  this  established,  it  cer- 
tainly ought  to  guide  us  in  our  interpretations  of  a  record 
which  professes  to  reveal  the  creative  acts  of  God.  If  we  thus 
view  nature  as  a  stream  of  causation  governed  by  a  certain 
law,  which  not  onlj'  regulates,  but  limits,  its  movements,  then 
the  supernatural,  as  its  name  imparts,  would  be  all  above  im- 
iure, — in  other  words,  that  power  of  God  which  is  employed 
'  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  will,'  in  originating, 
controlling,  limiting,  increasing,  opposing,  or  terminating 
nature,  whether  it  be  the  universal,  or  any  particular  or  par- 
tial, nature.  Thus  regarded,  the  supernatural  would  assume 
various  aspects,  to  which  we  may  give  distinctive  names.  As 
originating  nature,  we  may  call  it  the  ante-natural:  as  adding  a 
new  force  to  a  previously  existing  nature,  it  may  be  styled 
'prseternatural,  althougli  there  are  some  uses  of  the  word  that 
might  var}'  from  this  idea.  If  such  new  power,  though 
higher  than  tlie  previous  nature,  is  in  harmony  with  and 
works  through  it,  tlius  producing  a  higher  order  of  results, 
though  still  through  it  and  by  it,  then  it  may  be  named  the 
connatural,  since  in  this  manner,  in  connection  with  the  old, 
it  truly  becomes  itself  a  new  nature.  When  the  divine  power 
is  in  immediate  and  direct  opposition  to  nature,  breaking 
through  its  laws,  and  producing  events  the  opposite  of  what 
would  have  come  out  of  its  unobstructed  sequences,  then 
may  we  rightly  call  it  the  contra-natural, — such  as  those  inter- 
positions that  are  generally  termed  miraculous." 

From  this  contemplation  of  the  supernatural,  it  will  be 
seen  that  it  must  be  totally  opposed  to  those  great  errors 
that  for  ages  have  been  developed  in  the  history  of  man. 
Consider  that  type  of  error  that  goes  under  the  general 
name  of  superstition.  The  teudencj'  of  the  human  mind 
perverted  is  like  a  pendulum,  to  swing  between  the  two 
extremes  of  superstition  and  intidelity.  By  a  logical  ne- 
cessity, the  mind  not  Christian  must  trust  to  one  of  these 
two  extremes  of  false  belief  or  no  belief.  It  must  confide 
in  a  system    that   degrades    reason    or    deifies  it,  or   trust 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  201 

iu  the  true  God,  and  the  supernatural  as  shown  in  natural 
or  revealed  theology. 

Under  the  aspect  of  superstition  will  come  all  the  varied 
forms  of  polytheism  that  have  existed  and  do  now  exist  in  the 
world.  But  polytheism,  as  its  name  imports,  is  the  religion  of 
many  gods.  It  consists  in  the  degrading  of  God  to  a  human 
level,  and  giving  supernatural  qualities  to  creatures.  It  is 
the  deilication  of  nature  under  its  endless  forms.  Polytheism 
has  been  the  prevailing  sin  of  heathendom  in  all  ages.  It  is 
especially  attractive  to  the  ignorant  masses  of  societv.  It 
saves  the  trial  of  thought,  investigation,  or  the  discipline  of 
reason  and  virtue.  It  gratifies  in  some  sense  the  religious 
craving  of  man,  while  it  obliterates  the  most  needful  distinc- 
tions to  guide  in  the  way  of  truth.  The  great  error  of  all 
superstition  lies  in  attaching  divine  qualities  and  the  super- 
natural to  creatures,  or  the  objects  of  inanimate  nature.  It 
will  easily  be  seen  that  the  polytheistic  element  must  always, 
witli  the  multitude,  ignorant  and  depraved,  be  more  power- 
ful than  that  of  any  other  form  of  delusion.  It  appeals  im- 
mediately to  the  senses.  There  is  much  in  it  to  gratify  the 
aesthetic  nature  and  take  captive  the  imagination.  It  pro- 
fesses to  quiet  the  conscience  under  its  load  of  guilt.  It  does 
not  limit  itself  to  one  form  alone  of  worship.  Its  gods 
are  as  varied  as  the  caprice  or  passions  of  the  nature.  Its 
objects  of  adoration  are  as  numerous  as  the  heart  could  de- 
sire. The  supernatural  is  not  restricted  to  one  god  alone. 
Thus  ancient  as  well  as  modern  polytheism  has  its  uniform 
type  of  the  degradation  of  the  true  God.  It  worships  in  the 
creature  those  qualities  that  are  but  the  deification  of  human 
selfishness,  lust,  and  passion.  The  human,  with  all  its  infir- 
mities and  all  its  passions,  is  exalted  to  the  divine,  and  con- 
sequently the  people,  too  ignorant  to  understand,  or  too 
willful  to  learn,  have  been  made  the  victims  of  priestcraft  and 
the  most  revolting  superstitions.  The  chains  of  spiritual 
slavery  have  been  forged  and  riveted  upon  millions  of  the  hu- 
man family,  simply  by  lowering  the  supernatural  to  the  natu- 
ral, and  substituting  false  idols  in  the  place  of  the  true  God. 

Nature-worship,  commencing  first  with  the  sun  and  moon 


202  THE  NATURAL  AND 

and  stars,  soon  degenerated  into  that  of  the  earth,  air,  water, 
fire;  and  then,  assuming  a  higher  degree  of  grossness,  there 
came  the  adoration  of  dead  heroes,  elevated  to  demigods  ;  and 
then  the  persons  of  living  emperors  were  made  divine,  and 
"worshiped  as  more  than  human  ;  and  from  this  the  descent  was 
rapid  to  the  beasts  of  the  Held,  to  lizards,  crocodiles,  snakes, 
and  even  the  insects.  Xow,  all  this  degradation  of  the  human 
mind  arose  from  tlie  false  ideas  entertained  of  the  supernatu- 
ral, and  the  confounding  it  with  the  natural ;  it  sprang  from 
giving  to  nature  and  its  objects  those  powers  that  alone  be- 
longed to  God.  The  i:)olytheistic  element  has  even  assumed 
the  garb  of  Christianity,  and,  wdiile  it  has  spurned  the  more 
revolting  forms  of  superstition,  yet  has  borrowed  from  the 
heathen  world  precise!}'  the  same  element  that  makes  it  so 
opposed  to  true  religion. 

In  Romanism,  while  the  unity  and  the  personality  of  God 
are  admitted,  yet  divine  honors  are  paid  to  saints,  to  angels,  to 
the  Virgin  Mary,  and  the  supernatural  is  ascribed  where  only 
the  natural  belongs.  The  great  peculiarity  of  Christianity  is, 
that  it  draws  wide  the  line  of  distinction  between  the  natural 
and  the  supernatural ;  it  makes  out  God  infinitelj'  diiferent 
from  and  above  his  workmanship.  But  polytheism,  by  remov- 
ing this  distinction,  and  ascribing  the  supernatural  to  the  ob- 
jects of  nature,  animate  or  inanimate,  and  especiall}'  to  beings 
having  human  inlirmities,  passions,  and  sins,  ends  in  invert- 
ing all  moral  traits.  Virtues  by  it  have  been  made  vices,  and 
vices  virtues.  The  worship  of  the  heart  being  directed  into 
a  wrong  channel,  adoration  itself  has  been  made  an  insult  to 
God  ;  and  the  more  superstition  has  secured  the  control  of  hu- 
man nature,  the  more  it  has  deteriorated  alike  in  true  knowl- 
edge and  virtue.  But  if  polytheism  has  been  the  religion  of 
the  ignorant,  pantheism  has  been  that  of  the  educated.  The 
polytheist  has  gods  many,  the  pantheist  makes  all  things  God. 
The  one  turns  into  a  wrong  channel  the  whole  religious  na- 
ture, the  other  blocks  up  that  channel  with  the  rubbish  of  a 
false  philanthropy.  The  former  blunts  all  the  moral  sensi- 
bilities, the  other  refines  them  away.  Both,  as  they  take  cap- 
tive the  mind  and  heart,  are  idolatrous;  but  the  idolatry  of 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  2C3 

the  polytheist  is  s}>eeific  and  sensible,  while  that  of  the  pan- 
theist is  general  and  vague.  The  supernatural,  with  the 
former,  is  the  common  quality  of  all  his  idols  ;  with  the  latter, 
the  general  condition  of  everything  or  nothing.  God,  in  the 
one,  is  degraded  to  nature  ;  in  the  other,  nature  is  elevated  to 
God.  In  both  the  true  God  is  denied  or  forgotten,  because 
all  tlie  qualities  that  distingaish  God  from  nature  are  obliter- 
ated. The  injury  done  to  the  moral  nature  is  most  marked. 
If  in  pantheism  ideal  or  materialistic  human  responsibility 
is  ignored,  in  polytheism  it  is  misdirected.  The  pantheist, 
merging  himself  into  the  one  universal  substance,  becomes 
simply  a  passive  recipient  of  influences  that  absolve  him  from 
all  accountability.  The  polytheist  has  his  responsibility 
divided  or  destroyed  by  the  conflicting  divinities  that  usurp 
the  worship  of  the  heart.  By  the  one  class  God  is  degraded 
to  the  low  level  of  sinful  humanity,  by  the  other  his  attri- 
butes of  personality,  freedom,  and  holiness  are  refined  away; 
and  thus  man  floats  on  the  sea  of  destiny  as  the  straws  of 
mere  caprice,  his  own  existence  an  enigma,  to  be  swallowed 
up  at  last  in  the  infinite  ocean  of  universal  being.  Trul}-,  the 
belief  of  the  pantheist  is  as  mournful  as  that  of  the  polytheist ; 
for  to  be  dashed  by  an  insane  pride  upon  the  rock  of  inexor- 
able necessity  is  quite  as  sad  as  to  be  drowned  by  the  love 
of  idols  in  the  turbid  waters  of  sensuality. 

The  evil  of  pantheism  is  not  restricted  to  modern  times. 
It  entered  deeply  into  all  the  literature  and  philosophy  of 
the  ancient  world.  Under  different  forms  it  flourished.  In 
Greece  and  Rome  it  was  the  common  infirmity  of  all  the  edu- 
cated classes.  Disgusted  with  the  imposture  and  priestcraft 
of  the  state  religions,  the  natural  revulsion  was  infidelity,  and 
this  became  plausible  only  as  it  took  the  form  of  pantheism. 
Unable  to  live  without  worshiping  something,  the  educated 
mind  of  the  heathen  lapsed  into  pantheism;  for  pantheism 
allowed  the  deification  of  nature;  and,  discarding  the  super- 
natural altogether,  it  permitted  just  that  exaltation  of  hu- 
manity that  flattered  the  pride  of  the  more  cultivated  por- 
tion of  society.  Consequently,  it  entered  largely  into  the 
teachings  of  the  Stoics  and  the  philosophers;  it  taught  the 


204  THE  NATURAL  AND 

doctriue  of  a  relentless  necessity,  and  gave  to  nature  the  type 
of  an  unalterable  fatality.  By  obliterating  the  chief  distinc- 
tiou  between  vice  and  virtue,  it  relieved  the  mind  of  the 
dread  of  responsibility,  and  became  the  more  attractive  as  it 
gratified  the  pride  that  took  away  the  fear  of  punishment. 

Pantheism  was  the  natural  revulsion  of  the  mind  from  the 
grossuess  of  superstition ;  simple  atheism  was  too  negative,  and 
not  so  congenial  to  the  religious  sensibilities.  It  was  easier 
to  imagine  everything  God  than  nothing;  to  suppose  nature 
an  external  emanation  from  the  Deity,  uncreated  like  him- 
self and  a  part  of  his  being,  than  to  deny  the  existence  of 
any  God  whatever.  Modern  pantheism  is  only  the  ancient 
dressed  up  in  a  new  garb ;  it  involves  essentially  the  same 
process  of  thought,  and  leads  to  the  same  results.  The  same 
conclusions  are  reached  by  Spinoza  and  Hegel,  that  the 
devotees  of  the  old  pantheistic  philosophy  arrived  at; 
both  begin  by  nuiking  no  distinction  between  God  and  na- 
ture, denying  the  divine  personality,  and  end  by  removing 
from  man  that  freedom  whicli  involves  accountability. 
Thus  it  will  be  seen  how  false  ideas  of  the  supernatural  have 
so  much  to  do  with  the  development  of  polytheism  and  pan- 
theism:  they  must  lead  to  some  form  or  other  of  superstition 
or  infidelity. 

The  existence  of  the  supernatural  is  also  opposed  to  the 
postulates  of  deism,  and  every  system  of  modern  philosophy 
which  holds  to  the  sufficiency  alone  of  reason  to  guide  man. 

Modern  infidelity  assumes  two  forms :  one,  that  which 
holds  to  the  sufficiency  of  reason  alone  in  religion  ;  the  other, 
that  which  trusts  implicitly  to  the  intuitions  and  the  feelings. 
The  former  declares  that  the  reason  is  enough  to  lead  into 
all  essential  truth  and  guide  in  the  way  of  virtue ;  the  latter 
insists  upon  the  sensibilities  as  a  source  alone  to  be  depended 
upon  ;  both  declare  that  the  supernatural  is  unnecessary,  and 
cannot  be  proved.  It  is  said  that  the  mind  can  learn  enough 
to  guide  from  the  works  of  nature,  and,  as  this  shows  an  infi- 
nite God,  why  seek  for  more  evidence  or  knowledge  of  his 
perfections  ? 

The  supernatural  is  discarded  simply  upon  the  ground  of 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  205 

the  uniformity  of  natural  law.  But  history  and  science,  as 
has  been  seen,  conclusively  establish  the  position  that  this 
uniformity  is  neither  uninterrupted  nor  eternal,  and  that  mir- 
acles, if  impossible  with  man,  are  possible  to  God,  and  have 
actually  taken  place.  If,  then,  the  mind  turns  to  the  present 
or  past  condition  of  humanity,  there  is  certainly  nothing  to 
encourage  the  belief  that  man  does  not  need  the  supernatu- 
ral to  help  in  his  difficulties,  or  more  truth  than  nature  gives 
to  guide  in  his  ignorance.  The  infidel,  who  looks  alone  to 
his  reason,  or  his  intuitions  and  feelings,  cannot  find  in  the 
unspeakable  degradation  of  heathen  nations  anything  to  con- 
vince him  of  their  sufficiency.  The  question  may  well  be 
asked.  If  (he  light  of  nature  is  all  that  man  v^'ants  to  guide  to 
the  knowledge  of  God,  why  has  it  not  done  this  ?  If  natural 
theology  is  amply  sufficient  to  make  mankind  truthful,  useful, 
and  virtuous,  then  what  means  the  mass  of  human  ignorance 
and  vice  existing  ? 

Deism  rests  for  its  main  support  upon  the  idea  of  the  im- 
possibility of  miracle,  and  the  undeviating  uniformity  of 
natural  law ;  but  it  must  throw  aside  science  and  history, 
ignore  all  the  evidence  of  testimony,  and  trust  itself  to  an 
assertion  that  is  at  war  with  all  just  ideas  of  God.  The  su- 
pernatural is  not  contrary  to  reason,  or  impossible  ;  it  is  not 
contrary,  for  that  which  is  above  the  reason  is  not  therefore 
opposed  to  it;  nor  is  it  impossible,  for  that  which  God  has  done 
he  may  do  again.  Thus  deism,  which  calls  the  reason  alone 
sufficient  for  the  discovery  of  truth  and  the  practice  of  vir- 
tue, discards  the  supernatural ;  because  to  admit  it  would  be 
to  confess  that  human  necessities  demand  something  more 
positive  and  reliable  than  the  reason. 

The  infidel,  who  holds  to  the  supreme  authority  of  the  in- 
tuitions and  the  feelings,  comes  to  the  same  conclusion,  while 
the  road  walked  in  may  be  altogether  diflferent.  The  sensi- 
bilities may  be  as  wrong  as  the  reason,  and  equally  as  unsafe 
as  the  only  guide  to  truth  or  virtue.  It  is  just  as  proper  for 
a  man  to  say  that  his  reason  is  God's  only  revelation  to  him, 
as  his  feelings  or  his  intuitions,  and  equally  as  pernicious  in 
practice,  if  either  assumption  leads  to  the  denying  of  the 


206  THE  NATURAL  AND 

supernatural.  The  real  question  of  the  present  day,  is  that 
involved  in  a  true  idea  of  the  supernatural. 

Reason  discards  superstition,  hut  it  finds  no  better  home 
in  the  baseless  fabrics  of  those  schools  of  philosophers  who 
resort  to  materialism  or  idealism  for  support.  The  infidelity 
that  ends  in  denying  human  responsibility  cannot  get  rid  at 
least  of  the  conscience  and  the  great  fact  of  human  govern- 
ment;  and  while  both  make  man  accountable  for  his  conduct 
to  man,  with  irresistible  logic  they  point  to  a  higher  source 
even  of  authority  and  law,  that  will  not  release  any  person 
from  obedience  upon  the  fatalistic  idea  of  man  being  simply 
a  machine.  All  correct  ideas  of  theism,  then,  must  lead  to 
the  supernatural,  as  the  only  remedy  against  the  deification  of 
natural  law  or  the  delusion  of  pantheism.  The  pendulum  of 
human  belief  may  swing  now  in  the  direction  of  superstition, 
and  now  in  that  of  the  opposite  error  of  pantheism;  but  one 
thing  is  certain,  the  human  mind  will  never  find  its  point  of 
rest,  never  reach  the  line  of  an  exact  equilibrium,  where  faith 
may  repose  itself  in  the  absolute  certainty  of  truth,  and 
human  reason  reach  the  rock  where  safely  it  may  build  for 
eternity,  until  it  confidently  trusts  in  the  interposition  of  the 
supernatural  wherever  infinite  wisdom  and  benevolence  may 
dictate,  independent  of  advice  or  help  from  any  creature  or 
thing. 

How  necessary,  then,  that  we  should  welcome  all  the  light 
that  comes  from  histor}-  and  science,  to  show  the  actual  de- 
velopment of  the  supernatural !  Why  is  it  that  infidelity,  that 
trusts  to  the  suificiency  of  reason  and  the  light  of  nature, 
should  be  so  anxious  to  deny  the  supernatural  ?  Is  it  not 
because,  if  admitted,  it  would  compel  to  the  reception  of  re- 
vealed theology,  and  with  this  the  whole  system  of  doctrines 
upon  which  it  is  based  ?  So  long  as  the  uniformity  of  natu- 
ral law  is  regarded  as  perpetual,  and  nature  the  sole  cause  of 
.all  existence,  it  will  always  be  true  that  revealed  religion  will 
be  denied.  But  the  distinction  has  been  shown  between  the 
absolute  and  the  finite,  the  uncreated  and  the  created,  and 
that  all  nature  must  have  its  limit  in  those  cyclical  ages  that 
make  indispensable  the  interposition  of  miracle.     However 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  207 

second  or  final  causes  may  be  manifested  in  nature,  jet  all 
have  an  appointed  circle  of  duration,  and  when  that  is  com- 
pleted, the  supernatural  must  intervene  to  restore,  resuscitate, 
or  create  a  new  nature.  Consequently,  nature  is  not  a  ma- 
chine of  unending  movement,  but  something  dependent  on 
the  supernatural  for  its  life  as  its  first  origin. 

The  professed  aim  of  Christianity- is  to  distinguish  between 
the  supernatural  and  the  natural,  and  deliver  from  the  fatal 
errors  of  superstition.  Unlike  infidelity,  it  places  nature  in 
its  true  relations  to  God  ;  to  the  reason  it  is  a  guide,  and  to 
the  sensibilities  a  restraining  and  regulating  power.  The 
first  end  of  infidelity  is  to  discredit  the  supernatural.  It 
denies  its  reality  altogether,  or  confounds  it  with  the  delu- 
sions of  superstition.  The  reason  and  the  sensibilities  being 
made  out  the  only  guide,  and  nature  the  sole  cause  of  all 
things  an  emanation  from  God,  or  simply  a  part  of  that  sub- 
stance which  is  infinite  and  eternal,  absolute  and  uncreated, 
the  natural  tendency  is  to  a  belief  that  sin  is  a  misfortune 
rather  than  a  crime,  and  that  what  is  called  the  supernatural 
is  onlj'  a  more  recondite  process  of  nature  or  subtle  develop- 
ment. It  is  said  that  nature's  laws  are  not  fully  understood, 
and  that  a  person  must  wait  patiently  until  a  higher  sttige  of 
science  and  knowledge  will  account  for  that  which  seems  to 
be  supernatural.  The  whole  argument  is  based  upon  the 
assertion  that  reason,  the  intuitions,  or  the  sensibilities,  are 
alone  sufficient  to  guide  mankind,  and  that  nature  is  the  only 
volume  open  for  instruction  ;  but  to  read  that  volume  as  it 
should  be  read,  is  not  the  aim  of  the  infidel.  By  making 
jiature  divine,  and  her  laws  immutable  and  eternal,  God  is 
as  eflfectually  shut  out  from  the  mind  and  the  heart  as  if  no 
God  existed.  Superstition,  with  all  its  errors,  admits  human 
responsibility  and  guilt,  although  it  directs  in  a  wrong  chan- 
nel the  religious  nature ;  but  infidelity  seeks  to  extinguish  it, 
or  to  smother  in  delusive  abstractions  the  deepest  convictions 
of  the  heart.  Consequently,  when  infidelity  finds  a  lodgment 
in  the  mind,  it  first  begins  by  denying  the  supernatural,  and 
then  by  deifying  the  natural.  But  there  are  truths  in  natural 
theology  that  confront  the  infidel  at  the  very  door  of  his 


208  THE  XA  TUBAL  AXD 

speculations,  and  which  he  mnst  meet  before  he  can  show 
that  his  nature-worship  is  sensible  or  right. 

The  great  fact  of  the  snpernatnral,  under  the  imposing  as- 
pect of  the  miraculous,  is  constantly  meeting  him  in  science 
and  history ;  and  when  it  is  viewed  under  its  more  concealed 
aspects,  it  shows  itself  as  the  essential  law  that  supports  na- 
ture and  preserves  the  universe  from  ruin.  The  power  of 
God  can  never  be  shown  to  be  delegated  absolutely  or  ex 
clusively  to  second  causes.  Give  to  nature  as  much  as  possi- 
ble the  mechanical  aspect,  and  yet  underlying  all  its  move- 
ments there  is  a  divine  energy  that  imparts  the  real  force  that 
makes  all  the  wheels  move.  Because  miracles  so  seldom  are 
seen,  and  only  at  those  great  epochs  of  time  when  nature 
must  have  a  new  nature,  or  when  the  old  nature  must  be  re- 
suscitated, or  when  some  crisis  of  momentous  interest  in  the 
moral  world  necessitates  it,  this  yet  is  no  argument  against 
the  existence  of  the  supernatural.  The  reason  why  the  mi- 
raculous should  be  of  seldom  occurrence  is  apparent;  but  this 
does  not  prove  that  other  forms  of  the  supernatural  are  ever 
wanting.  Could  we  see  the  intimate  dependence  of  nature 
upon  Gx>d.  could  we  observe  how  all  the  diversities  of  sensi- 
tive existence  and  all  the  complicated  mechanism  of  the 
physical  universe  do  really  hang  upon  his  will,  are  directed 
by  his  purpose,  and  made  to  act  through  his  sustaining 
power,  we  should  then  look  upon  the  supernatural  as  the 
normal  condition  of  all  nature,  and  the  natural  as  related  to 
it  as  intimately  as  cause  and  effect.  Gx"»d  would  be  seen  in  his 
works,  worshiped  as  the  author  of  all  blessings,  recognized 
in  all  existences,  and  believed  upon  as  infinite  in  all  perfec- 
tion. Man.  to  achieve  the  highest  moral  elevation,  must  avoid 
equally  superstition  and  infidelity:  for,  while  the  former  con- 
founds the  natural  with  the  supernatural,  the  latter  makes  out 
only  the  natural  existing,  and  this  is  his  god. 

But  the  ways  in  which  the  supernatural  may  exist  and  yet 
not  be  recognized  are  innumerable.  It  may  act  with  nature, 
giving  it  only  another  direction,  concealed,  indeed,  but  not 
the  less  real.  Then  it  may  be  a  new  energy  imparted  in  the 
spiritual  world ;  and  from  this  mental  acts  and  feelings  may 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  200 

originate  impossible  before.  Then  it  may  act  through  second 
causes,  in  the  wa}*  of  new  thoughts,  new  motives,  new  im- 
pulses, and  this  may  be  done  in  such  a  way  as  most  effectu- 
ally to  secure  the  object  desired.  It  may  give  in  prayer  a 
more  than  mortal  wisdom  and  directness,  or  it  mav  answer 
it  through  countless  varieties  of  adjustment  of  means  to  an 
end  higher  than  the  natural,  and  yet  in  alliance  with  it. 
Through  the  whole  department  of  the  physical  and  spiritual 
universe  it  may  be  present,  now  helping,  now  changing,  now 
suppressing,  and  now  adjusting  the  forces  of  nature,  so  that 
without  ever  acting  as  in  miracle  against  nature,  it  may  yet 
secure  an  end  with  a  certainty  as  great  as  that  of  the 
hio:hest  exertion  of  creative  enersv.  How  near  the  natural 
may  be  to  the  supernatural  is  only  faintly  shadowed  forth 
in  the  words,  "  In  him  we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our 
being."  This  is  not  mere  metaphor :  in  a  sense  most  vital 
and  true,  God  is  spoken  of  as  near  to  man,  and  near  to  all 
the  natures  he  has  given,  be  they  physical  or  moral. 

The  great  element  that  distinguishes  Christianity  above  all 
superstition  and  all  infidelity,  is  the  revelation  of  the  coexist- 
ence of  the  human  and  the  divine :  the  coworking  of  the 
natural  and  the  supernatural,  each  in  their  distinct  sphere, 
and  yet  each  as  truly  as  if  only  the  human  or  the  divine  had 
any  action  whatever. 

The  supernatural,  then,  is  made  known  to  us  as  existing  in 
man}"  ways  concealed,  and  then  in  the  open  method  of  mira- 
cle. It  may  be  often  a  power  above  nature,  and  altogether 
distinct  from  it,  and  yet  be  an  energy  bringing  about  the 
most  important  effects,  undistinguished  in  the  mind  from  the 
common  operations  of  nature.  But  the  great  cyclical  law 
holds  all  natures  with  a  grasp  that  none  can  elude ;  there  does 
come  a  time  when  the  longest,  even  as  the  most  ephemeral 
of  created  things,  must  have  an  end.  The  undying  youth  of 
anything  made  by  God  is  possible  only  by  the  interposition 
of  miracle.  God  never  confers  immortality  as  the  necessary 
condition  of  any  nature, — no  nature  is  thus  independent  of 
him.     The  inspired  word  declares  the  immortality  of  soul 

U 


210  THE  NATURAL  AND 

and  bod}'  in  the  resurrection  state,  but  it  is  only  through  the 
interposition  of  the  supernaturah 

An  inlierent  power  of  endless  life  apart  from  this  can 
never  be  predicated  of  any  creature,  however  exalted  in  virtue 
or  intelligence.  God  reserves  to  himself  alone  the  power  of 
an  endless  life;  and  when  he  bestows  it  on  any  nature  it 
must  come  under  the  law  of  the  supernatural,  and  not  the 
natural.  Now,  all  infidelity  overlooks  this  essential  condi- 
tion common  to  all  natures,  general  or  specific.  Looking 
on]}'  to  the  regularity  of  natural  law,  it  forgets  that  this  does 
not  constitute  the  efficient  cause,  and  that  the  endless  per- 
petuity of  any  nature  can  no  more  be  shown  to  be  its  normal 
condition  than  can  the  origin  of  any  nature  be  proved  to  be 
without  miracle.  If  creation  involves  the  necessity  of  the 
supernatural,  equally  true  does  endless  existence. 

Infidelity,  then,  is  just  as  unreasonable  as  superstition,  and, 
in  some  aspects,  more  pernicious.  While  boasting  of  freedom 
from  its  bondage,  it  yet  leads  to  the  ver}'  region  and  shadow 
of  death ;  it  forces  man  to  the  experience  of  a  desolation, 
where,  upon  the  altar  of  an  insane  pride,  there  is  sacri- 
ficed all  that  can  truly  bless  in  time  or  save  in  eternity.  It 
calls  itself  free,  but  it  is  that  freedom  that  grasps  at  the 
shadow  and  loses  the  substance.  Having  none  of  the  elevat- 
ing truths  of  Christianity  to  guide  or  console,  and  nothing  to 
trust  in  but  the  poor  light  of  human  philosophy,  it  makes 
more  truly  hopeless  the  condition  than  the  gross  delusions  of 
superstition.  It  rejoices  in  the  idea  that  there  is  nothing 
supernatural,  that  nature  itself  is  eternal,  and  her  laws  alone 
that  deserve  obedience  or  esteem ;  but  the  idea  of  God, 
however  unwelcome,  can  never  be  altogether  excluded  from 
the  mind.  If  the  infidel  makes  out,  in  his  own  mind,  con- 
science, responsibility,  and  divine  law  a  dream,  yet  he  will 
find  it  impossible  to  shake  it  off;  it  will  follow  the  nature 
more  persistently  than  the  waking  hours  of  the  day,  and 
plunge  it,  though  ever  so  reluctant,  in  one  long  night  of 
gloom. 

What  is  there,  then,  that  infidelity  can  stand  upon,  whether 
it  takes  the  form  of  rationalism,  deism,  materialistic,  or  ideal 


THE  SUPERNATURAL.  211 

pan  theism,  or  atheism  ?  What  can  be  made  out  of  nature 
with  the  supernatural  denied?  Does  it  prove  no  God 
and  no  miracle?  Is  its  voice  that  of  chance  or  fatalism? 
Does  it  call  itself  eternal,  or  an  emanation  from  the  inii- 
nite?  Does  it  show  law  never  changed  or  interrupted? 
Is  not  its  whole  history  that  of  birth,  life,  and  death,  of 
ao;es  measured  by  great  or  lesser  epochs  of  time,  all  under 
that  mighty  cyclical  law  that  extends  over  the  whole  uni- 
verse? Does  it  not  teach  the  lesson  of  highest  interest  that 
there  is  no  creature  or  thing,  no  existence  animate  or  inani- 
mate, that  is  not  as  dependent  on  the  Almighty  for  its  being  as 
its  creation?  And  whether  that  being  shall  survive  in  any  in- 
stance the  universal  law  of  all  natures,  must  depend  alone  upoji 
the  interposition  of  God,  imparting  that  which  nature  is  power- 
less to  perform. 

Most  truly  has  Horace  Bushnell,  in  his  work  on  Nature 
and  the  Supernatural,  remarked :  "  God  is  expressed  but  not 
measured  by  his  works ;  least  of  all,  by  the  substances  and 
laws  included  under  the  general  term  nature.  And  yet  how 
liable  are  we,  overpowered,  as  we  often  are,  and  oppressed  by 
the  magnitudes  of  nature,  to  sutler  the  impression  that  there 
can  be  nothing  separate  and  superior  beyond  nature.  The 
eager  mind  of  science,  for  example,  sallying  forth  on  excur- 
sions of  thought  into  the  vast  abysses  of  worlds,  discovering 
tracts  of  light  that  must  have  been  shooting  downward  and 
away  from  their  sources,  even  for  millions  of  ages,  to  have  now 
arrived  at  their  mark,  and  then,  discovering  also  that,  by 
such  a  reach  of  computation,  it  has  not  penetrated  to  the 
center,  but  only  reached  the  margin  or  outmost  shore  of  the 
vast  iire-ocean,  whose  particles  are  astronomic  worlds,  falls 
back  spent;  and  having,  as  it  were,  no  spring  left  for  another 
trial,  or  the  endeavor  of  a  stronger  flight,  surrenders,  over- 
mastered and  helpless,  crushed  into  silence.  At  such  an 
hour  it  is  anything  but  a  wonder  that  nature  is  taken  for  the 
all,  the  veritable  system  of  God;  beyond  which,  or  collateral 
with  which,  there  is  nothing.  For  so  long  a  time  is  science 
improved  upon  by  nature,  not  instructed  by  it;  as  if  there 
could  be  nothing  greater  than  distance,  measure,  quantity. 


212        THE  NATURAL  AND    THE  SUPERNATURAL. 

and  show  nothing  higher  than  the  formal  phatitude  of  things. 
But  the  healthy,  living  mind  will,  sooner  or  later,  recover 
itself.  It  will  spring  up  out  of  this  prostration  before  nature 
to  imagine  other  things,  which  eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear 
heard,  nor  science  computed.  It  will  discover  fires,  even  in 
itself,  that  flame  above  the  stars.  It  will  break  over  and 
through  the  narrow  confines  of  stellar  organization  to  con- 
ceive a  spiritual  kosmos,  or  divine  system,  which  contains 
and  uses,  and  is  only  shadowed  in  the  faintest  manner  by,  the 
prodigious  trivialities  of  external  substance.  Indeed,  I  think 
all  minds  unsophisticated  by  science,  or  not  disempowered  by 
external  magnitudes,  will  conceive  God  as  a  being  whose 
fundamental  plan,  whose  purpose,  end,  and  system,  are  no- 
wise measured  by  that  which  lies  in  dimension,  even  though 
the  dimensions  be  measureless.  They  will  say,  with  Zophar, 
still, — '  the  measure  thereof  is  longer  than  the  earth,  and 
broader  than  the  sea;'  and  the  real,  proper  universe  of  God, 
that  which  is  to  God  the  final  cause  of  all  things,  will  be  to 
them  a  realm  so  far  transcending  the  outward  immensity, 
both  in  quantity  and  kind,  that  this  latter  will  be  scarcely 
more  than  some  outer  gate  of  approach,  or  eyelet  of  obser- 
vation." 


CHAPTER    XXII. 

THE    HUMAN,  THE    SUPERHUMAN,  AND    THE    DIVINE. 

The  bnnian  must  comprehend  all  that  which  is  in  accord- 
ance with  its  constitution.  The  constitution  must  be  that 
which  is  in  acordance  with  its  nature.  Human,  constitution, 
and  nature,  all  mean  the  same  thing  as  related  to  man.  But 
what  is  man's  nature,  unless  it  be  that  which  embraces  both 
his  body  and  mind  ?  Is  not  his  nature  comprehensively  the 
phj'sical,  mental,  and  moral  parts  of  his  constitution  ?  If 
this  is  so,  is  it  not  a  contradiction  to  speak  of  any  part  of 
man's  nature  as  supernatural  ?  The  great  idea  all  attach  to 
the  human  is  simply  that  which  pertains  to  the  nature  of  the 
human,  and,  therefore,  that  which  is  Vnanifested  in  accord- 
ance with  the  laws  of  the  human.  All  that  is  human  is 
therefore  natural,  so  far  as  man's  constitution  is  concerned; 
and  all  that  is  natural  must  therefore  mean  all  that  acts  in 
accordance  with  the  laws  of  the  natural. 

But  it  is  said  human  volitions  act  outside  of  the  line  of 
cause  and  effect,  and  therefore  are  supernatural.  But  cause 
and  effect  cannot  be  restricted  alone  to  the  inorganic,  organic, 
or  animal  kingdom.  It  cannot  be  said  that  man  in  his  voli- 
tion is  an  exception  to  this  law,  because  man  is  free  in  his 
volitions.  Those  who  hold  this  theory  overlook  the  brute 
creation,  and  do  not  consider  that,  in  some  respects,  if  true, 
it  must  also  hold  real  with  brutes,  so  far  as  they  have  any- 
thing corresponding  to  the  human  mind.  The  great  mistake 
many  make  in  reasoning  upon  cause  and  effect,  is  that  they 
imagine  it  to  be  the  same  in  mind  as  in  matter,  and  because 
in  the  physical  world  matter  is  passive,  and  must  be  acted 
upon  ;  and  the  result  invariably  follows  the  same,  from  like 
causes,  with  no  possibility  to  the  contrary,  that  this  must  be 
equallv  true  in  the  spiritual  world. 

(213) 


214  THE  HUMAN,  THE  SUPERHUMAN, 

Bat  human  volitions  are  self-caused,  they  are  ah  intra,  and 
with  full  power  to  the  contrary',  and  therefore  must  be  volun- 
tary, free,  and  unforced.  Cause  and  effect  in  the  world  of 
mind  are  essentially  diflerent  from  cause  and  effect  in  the 
world  of  matter.  iSTecessity  rules  in  the  one,  freedom  in  the 
other.  Consequently,  to  illustrate  mental  and  moral  effects 
by  any  analogy  taken  from  matter,  is  unphilosophical,  even 
as  it  is  opposed  to  the  intuitive  convictions  of  the  under- 
standing. And  yet,  in  a  real  sense,  all  conduct  proceeds 
from  motives;  and  there  is  always  an  influence  as  certain,  in 
the  moral  world,  to  be  followed  by  effects,  as  exists  through 
the  ofreat  law  of  cause  and  effect  in  the  world  of  matter. 
Does  any  conduct  lead  to  the  idea  that  motives  have  had 
nothing  to  do  with  that  conduct?  Is  it  not  the  peculiar  pre- 
rogative of  the  mind  that  it  is  susceptible  to  motives,  and  is 
influenced  always  one  way  or  another  by  motives  ? 

In  that  department  of  nature  where  cause  and  effect  are 
ah  extra,  we  see  the  manifestation  of  a  law  of  force  irresisti- 
ble? we  can  always  say  that  such  effects  will  follow  invariably 
such  causes;  and  therefore  the  idea  of  freedom  is  altogether 
wanting,  and  it  is  wanting  because  there  is  no  power  to  the 
contrary  existing.  But  in  the  world  of  mind  and  human 
volition  it  is  essentially  different.  Because  a  man  acts  from 
motives  he  is  free,  for  there  is  always,  ah  intra,  a  power  to  the 
contrary.  Thus  the  true  idea  of  moral  freedom  is  invariably 
power  to  act  differently  from  that  which  is  acted,  and  always 
power  to  act  free  in  the  very  volition  that  leads  to  vicious  or 
right  conduct.  There  is  first  a  self-conscious  power  in  the 
very  act  of  choice,  and  then  a  perfect  conviction  of  the  mind 
that  a  different  course  might  be  pursued.  But  if  men  act 
from  motives,  then  motives  are  a  cause  in  conduct  just  as 
truly  as  force  is  a  cause  in  making  a  ball  fly  through  the  air. 
But  here  consists  the  great  difference,  the  ball  is  passive,  and 
has  no  power  to  resist  the  force  applied,  and  must  always  act 
the  same  wntli  the  same  force  applied, — like  results  will  in- 
variably follow  from  like  causes  ;  but  the  mind  has  not  only 
the  power  to  choose  in  all  motives,  to  be  influenced  by  one 
and  not  by  another,  but  it  has  a  twofold  freedom : — freedom 


AND    THE  DIVINE.  215 

ill  the  very  act  of  choice,  and  freedom  before  this  act  to  the 
contrary.  It  has  the  highest  evidence  of  this  in  conscious- 
ness, and  in  all  its  feelings  and  thoughts  in  relation  to  the 
conduct  of  others. 

But  still  we  know  that  conduct  is  as  much  the  result  of 
motives  presented  as  it  is  free  in  the  act  of  choice.  Now, 
many  have  drawn  the  inference  that  because  men  act  from 
the  strongest  motives,  that  men  must  act  from  them,  and  that 
conduct  is  as  much  the  result  of  necessity  as  the  rolling  of  a 
stone  is  the  result  of  force,  and  consequently  human  volitions 
are  not  free.  Here  a  double  mistake  is  made  :  first,  by  con- 
founding action  ab  intra  with  action  ah  extra^  that  self-caused 
with  that  acted  upon,  a  development  under  the  condition  of 
inherent  activity  with  that  of  essential  passivity ;  and  secondly, 
by  asserting  that  all  choice  proceeds  from  the  strongest  mo- 
tive ;  but  the  only  plausible  argument  for  this  is  simply  assert- 
ing that  whatever  brings  about  a  certain  result  or  effect  is  for 
the  time  being  the  strongest  motive,  and  inferring  this  because 
the  law  of  the  strongest  force  always  holds  good  in  things; 
but  persons  are  not  things  because  there  is  absolute  freedom 
to  choose  from  the  weaker  motive  as  truly  as  from  the 
strongest  motive,  and  in  the  case  of  sin  because  the  weaker 
motive  does  really  exist  to  bring  abont  choice.  The  greatest 
motive  to  a  man  is  himself;  and  endless  confusion  has  fol- 
lowed this  vain  effort  to  weigh  motives  in  the  same  scales 
in  which  sugar  and  salt  are  weighed.  The  fact  is,  that  con- 
duct must  be  the  result  of  motives,  for  it  is  an  absurdity  to 
predicate  choice  with  no  influence,  and  therefore  such  influ- 
ence must  be  in  a  true  sense  a  cause  of  action. 

All  human  volitions  are  absolutely  free  to  take  up  with 
any  motive  whatever.  This  being  so,  it  is  doing  the  cause 
of  moral  freedom  the  greatest  possible  injustice  to  fasten  on 
to  it  the  old  theory  of  the  strongest  motive.  In  the  sense  in 
which  the  term  very  often  is  used  it  leads  to  fatalism,  and 
creates  a  doctrine  of  necessity  that  is  peculiarly  pernicious 
to  that  responsibility  to  which  God  and  man  hold  us  for  our 
conduct.  It  is  begging  the  question  to  say  that  the  strong- 
est motive  to  a  man  is  that  which  secures  his  choice.     This 


216  THE  HUMAN,  THE  SUPERHUMAN, 

is  the  very  tiling  in  dispute.  It  is  simply  saying,  because  a 
man  acts  from  such  a  motive,  therefore  it  is  the  strongest, 
and  it  is  the  strongest  because  he  thus  acts.  Now,  all  this  is 
assuming  the  very  thing  to  be  proved.  Why  may  not  God 
make  the  human  mind  free  to  act  from  any  motive,  strong 
or  weak  ?  Why  may  not  the  very  idea  of  guilt  be  involved 
in  taking  the  unworthy,  the  weak  motive,  in  preference  to 
the  noble  and  the  strong?  Why  may  not  self-consciousness 
declare  that  its  great  sin  consists  in  disregarding  the  rational, 
the  good  motive,  and  taking  up  with  the  irrational  and  the 
foolish  motive  ?  The  fact  is,  the  man  determines  the  motive 
vastly  more  than  the  motive  the  man. 

And  this  leads  us  to  consider  that  what  passes  under  the 
phrase,  the  strongest  motive,  is  the  most  general,  vague,  and 
loose  of  all  expressions,  and  is  used  to  mean  much  or  little 
as  a  man  may  please.  The  ideas  comprehended  in  the  word 
motive  are  the  most  complex  imaginable.  It  comprehends 
everything  that  influences  the  mind;  and  what  is  it  that  in- 
fluences the  mind  ?  Who  can  tell  ?  It  may  be  that  without 
us  or  that  within  us ;  the  internal  or  the  external ;  other 
persons  or  ourselves;  it  may  have  reference  to  things  ani- 
mate or  inanimate;  feelings  or  perceptions,  and  a  thousand 
and  one  things  which  cannot  be  described. 

Is  it  not  then  irrational  to  talk  about  the  strongest  motive 
as  if  it  was  as  susceptible  of  weight  as  a  pound  of  coftee  ? 
Is  it  reasonable  to  believe  a  necessity  exists  in  it  to  act  from 
it  as  irresistible  as  that  which  brings  a  stone  to  the  ground  ? 
Upon  a  certain  class  of  minds  this  method  of  reasoning  is 
peculiarly  unhappy ;  it  drives  them  to  the  repudiation  in  vo- 
litions of  the  law  of  cause  and  eft'ect,  or  the  making  out  all 
human  volitions  as  supernatural.  But  we  shall  show  that 
the  strict  meaning  of  the  supernatural  is  that  which  is  above 
nature,  that  which  nature  cannot  do. 

But  is  human  volition  not  in  accordance  with  the  very  na- 
ture God  has  given  to  man,  his  very  constitution?  Is  not  this 
humanity,  with  its  complex  powers,  really  natural,  as  distin- 
guished from  the  supernatural?  The  fallacy  of  those  who 
call  human  volitions   supernatural,  is  found  in  the  fact  that 


AXD    THE  DIVINE.  217 

they  overlook  the  truth  that  the  mhid  was  made  to  act  natu- 
rally as  much  as  the  body;  to  act  according  to  its  nature,  and 
as  certainly  as  the  action  of  the  brute  creation  or  the  inor- 
ganic kingdom:  but,  says  the  objector,  mind  is  a  power. 
Very  true,  and  so  also  the  lioness  fighting  to  save  her  young 
is  a  power.  The  human  power  may  be  a  very  diiterent 
power,  but  it  is  not  for  that  a  supernatural  power.  Mental 
activity  never  can  go  further  than  its  nature  permits,  no 
more  than  physical  power.  The  supernatural  should  only  be 
used  as  restricted  to  the  divine.  What  is  supernatural  is 
that  which  God  does.  The  sphere  of  its  activity  is  the  divine, 
while  the  natural  is  the  sphere  of  the  human.  The  error  in 
making  all  human  volitions  supernatural  is  quite  as  great  as 
that  of  denying  altogether  the  supernatural.  If  the  one  leads 
to  infidelity,  the  other  verges  far  into  pantheism.  Nature  is 
simply  the  constitution  God  has  given  to  things  and  persons 
— to  his  kingdom,  be  it  inorganic,  organic,  animal,  human,  or 
angelic.  It  is  a  comprehensive  term,  embodying  everything 
made  in  distinction  from  the  maker.  And  the  supernatural 
is  that  which  is  above  nature,  or  any  power  in  it,  be  it  phys- 
ical or  mental.  It  is  of  great  importance  that  this  distinction 
should  be  clearly  defined  and  resolutely  held  to.  Give  it  up, 
and  the  whole  doctrine  of  inspiration  as  a  divine  influence 
is  thrown  into  confusion,  and  no  line  really,  with  truth,  can 
be  drawn  between  the  supernatural  in  that  which  man  does 
and  the  supernatural  in  that  which  God  does.  It  is  quite  as 
important  that  the  mind  sliould  be  disabused  of  the  sophistry 
conveyed  in  the  -phrase,  the  strongest  motive.  Man  is  not  a  ma- 
chine because  it  acts  ab  intra,  is  self-caused,  and  can  choose 
an}'  motive  whatever.  The  great  sin  in  man  lies  in  the  fact 
that  it  is  abnormal,  irrational,  contrary  to  the  strongest  mo- 
tives of  right,  happiness,  affection,  and  goodness.  It  is  a  war 
of  the  lower  nature  against  the  higher,  passion  against  reason, 
pride  against  humility,  lust  against  purity,  violence  against 
order,  intemperance  against  temperance,  avarice  against  pru- 
dence, and  hatred  against  love.  The  reason  why  the  language, 
the  strongest  motive,  is  held  by  us  as  always  applicable  to  the 
action  of  the  mind,  is  because  we  insensibly  fall  into  the  idea 


218  THE  HUMAN,   THE  SUPERHUMAN, 

that  what  is  true  of  things  is  also  so  of  persons.  Cause  and 
effect  in  tilings  is  always  as  the  strongest  force,  and  there  is 
no  power  to  the  contrary.  In  things  all  is  necessary,  uni- 
form, and  inevitable.  Thus,  like  causes  produce  like  effects 
under  all  circumstances  and  occasions  But  in  mind  the  law 
of  causality  is  altogether  distinct.  There  is  no  possible 
analogy  between  the  two.  The  difference  is  as  radical  as  the 
nature  is  distinct. 

In  all  language  we  indeed  speak  of  motives  as  the  cause  of 
volition,  because  the  mind  is  made  to  be  influenced  by  them, 
yet  its  freedom  of  action  is  the  essential  condition  of  its  ex- 
istence. The  mental  constitution  is  made  for  freedom,  as 
much  as  the  air  for  breathing,  and  this  freedom  has  a  two- 
fold character — power  to  act  differently  from  what  is  done, 
and  then  power  to  choose  any  motive  whatever,  strong  or 
weak.  Why,  then,  is  the  language,  the  mind  always  acts 
from  the  strongest  motive,  so  common  ?  First,  because  we 
fall  insensibly  into  the  idea  that  the  mental  constitution  is  a 
sort  of  machine;  secondl}',  because  we  confound  the  success- 
ful motive  with  the  strongest  motive.  The  mind  always  does 
act  from  the  successful  motive,  for  this  always  is  chosen  in 
preference  to  any  other.  But  does  this  mean  that  what  in- 
fluences is  in  itself  always  the  strongest  motive  ?  Have 
motives  weight,  as  stone?  Does  not  cojiscience  dechire  that 
in  sin  the  weakest  motive  is  chosen  ?  Does  not  folly  pecu- 
liarly consist  in  taking  up  with  the  most  insignificant  con- 
siderations, and  overlooking  the  greatest  ?  Is  not  the  very 
guilt  of  wickedness,  that  it  is  so  irrational,  so  senseless,  so 
destitute  of  all  worthy  motive?  We  cannot  get  round  this 
by  saying  that  such  motives  to  the  wicked  are  the  strongest ; 
they  are  the  successful  motives,  because  they  secure  the  re- 
sult. But  strength  and  success  are  not  convertible  terms. 
The  true  idea  of  freedom  is,  that  while  it  is  the  law  of  the 
mind  to  act  from  motives,  it  is  equally  the  law  of  the  mind 
to  take  up  with  any  motive,  and  free  always  to  do  difterently 
from  that  which  it  does  do.  The  ambiguous  phraseology  of 
the  strongest  motive  leads  into  materialism,  or  into  the  fatal 
error  of  necessity.     In  this  sense  we  hold  to  the  self-deter- 


AND    THE  DIVINE.  219 

mining  power  of  the  will ;  not  that  motive  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  will,  but  that  the  will  can  act  from  any  motive,  and 
always  with  power  to  the  contrary.  We  contend  that  all  this 
action  of  the  mind  is  natural,  because  it  is  in  accordance  with 
tlie  constitution  God  gave  it.  Volitions  are  as  natural  in  the 
spiritual  world  as  gravitation  in  the  material  :  the  one  is  a 
mental  power,  the  other  a  physical  power  ;  one  is  free,  the 
other  necessitated ;  one  self-active,  the  other  acted  upon. 
Force  in  the  material  world  is  always  blind,  in  the  spiritual 
world  intelligent;  in  one  it  has  the  essential  characteristic  of 
necessity  ;  in  the  other,  of  liberty. 

Holding,  as  we  do,  to  the  most  unrestricted  idea  of  freedom 
in  human  volitions,  and  in  no  respect  disposed  to  encumber 
it  with  the  ill-defined  and  unfortunate  phraseology  of  the 
strongest  motive,  believing  that  it  is  the  man  that  determines 
the  motive  vastly  more  than  the  motive  the  man,  and  that 
motive  is  the  most  complex  of  all  ideas,  and  cannot  in  any 
true  sense  be  defined  in  many  cases  of  volition,  and  feeling 
that  no  language  should  be  used  to  impair  in  the  least  human 
accountability  and  freedom,  yet  we  cannot  for  a  moment  hold 
to  the  opinion,  full  of  danger  to  all  correct  ideas  of  inspi- 
ration and  the  divine  action  upon  men,  that  volitions  are 
supernatural.  The  supernatural  is  the  divine,  as  distin- 
guished from  both  the  human  and  the  superhuman.  What 
is  the  superhuman  ?  It  is  simply  that  which  is  above  the 
power,  or  transcends  the  strength  of  man.  We  read  that 
other  beings  exist  besides  the  human  :  now,  the  exercise  of 
their  power  must  be  superhuman.  Angels  have  a  nature  as 
truly  as  men,  but  not  the  same  nature:  all  their  actions 
must  therefore  be  superhuman  ;  and  if  we  could  conceive  of 
an  order  of  beings  higher  than  the  angelic,  it  would  be  true 
that  the  action  of  such  beings  would  be  superangelic,  as  their 
action  is  superhuman  ;  but  in  no  true  sense  could  their  action 
be  called  supernatural,  for  it  is  not  above  their  nature,  it  is 
as  their  nature,  and  therefore  must  be  natural.  To  do  away 
with  this  distinction  is  to  throw  the  greatest  obscurity  upon 
the  whole  subject  of  the  divine  influences  and  power. 
We  believe  God  takes  exclusively  to  himself  the  preroga- 


220  THE  HUMAN,  THE  SUPERHUMAN, 

tive  of  the  supernatural,  for  nature  must,  in  innumerable 
ways,  be  under  his  influence  and  control.  All  human  or  an- 
gelic volition  is  in  accordance  with  the  constitution  God 
gives,  and  whenever  action  in  either  is  above  that  constitu- 
tion, then  it  is  through  the  influence  of  the  supernatural,  and 
the  glory  alone  belongs  to  God.  The  idea  of  inspiration  is 
simply  the  influence  of  the  Almighty  on  human  thought 
above  the  plane  of  the  natural,  and  transcending  all  creature 
power.  The  miraculous  always  includes  the  supernatural, 
but  the  supernatural  does  not  usually  the  miraculous.  If  it 
is  said  that  either,  or  both,  act  in  accordance  with  law,  it  is 
only  true  in  the  sense  that  this  law  is  the  will  of  God  him- 
self. The  whole  subject  of  law,  as  applied  to  the  Deity,  is 
simply  the  method  he  proposes  to  himself,  and  what  that 
method  is  can  only  be  known  to  God. 

The  divine,  then,  as  distinguished  from  the  human  or  the 
superhuman,  is  simply  the  supernatural  as  the  method  of  God 
in  relation  to  all  his  action  in  the  world  of  matter  or  mind. 
It  embraces  all  degrees  of  the  divine  action,  in  controlling,  di- 
recting, or  creating  things  or  persons.  It  is  the  divine  power, 
as  distinguished  from  all  creature  power.  Consequently  this 
action  of  God  must  possess  in  its  nature  something  essen- 
tially distinct  from  all  creature  action,  and  all  developments 
of  mind  or  matter.  The  supernatural  is  the  sphere  of  God 
alone,  while  nature,  or  the  natural,  is  the  sphere  of  all  crea- 
ture activity,  be  it  human  or  angelic.  It  then  should  be 
always  remembered,  that  when  the  human  mind  acts  above 
the  natural,  or  transcends  the  limits  of  the  natural,  then  the 
reason  is  simply  it  is  under  the  control  of  the  supernatural. 
This  is  always  divine,  the  energy  of  God  himself  coming  in 
contact  with  human  activity  and  thought,  and  bringing  about 
those  results  that  wolild  be  impossible  if  the  natural  only  was 
relied  upon.  This  view  of  the  supernatural  is  peculiarly  con- 
sistent with  all  correct  ideas  of  second  causes.  Second 
causes,  in  matter  or  mind,  are  the  powers  that  are  manifested 
in  both,  and  which  grow  out  of  the  constitution  of  both.  A 
cause  is  force,  force  is  power,  and  power  is  simply  producing 
results.     Now,  the  doctrine  of  second  causes,  material  or  im- 


AND    THE  DIVINE.  221 

material,  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  God  has  given  to  every 
nature  its  own  peculiar  constitution, — that  this  constitution 
has  its  own  laws,  and  these  laws  are  revealed  by  the  activi- 
ties of  all  natures  in  every  department  of  God's  kingdom. 

To  contend  that  there  is  only  one  cause,  and  deny  second 
causes,  is  simply  the  essence  of  pantheism,  and  all  fatality  as 
applied  to  human  conduct.  It  means  that  human  action  is  but 
a  mode  of  the  divine  action,  and  consequently  no  such  thing 
as  human  responsibility.  But  we  contend  that  God  can  make 
second  causes  either  necessary  or  free.  He  can  give  to  crea- 
tion a  nature  with  no  liberty/,  as  well  as  a  nature  iviih  liberty. 
This  is  what  in  human  and  angelic  creatures  he  has  done. 
But  the  great  First  Cause  must  reserve  for  himself  the  sov- 
ereignty of  creation ;  and  while  he  gives  all  the  freedom  that 
the  creature  can  have,  he  certainly  will  not  disrobe  himself 
of  the  supernatural,  in  directing  and  controlling  all  things  in 
subserviency  to  the  highest  good  of  the  universe.  It  is  for 
this  reason  we  object  so  strongly  to  the  use  of  the  super- 
natural, as  applied  to  human  or  angelic  volitions.  ISTeither 
man  nor  angel  can  act  above  his  own  nature,  or  by  any  in- 
herent energy  get  beyond  the  sphere  of  second  causes.  All 
causality  must  be  absolute  or  dependent:  absolute  in  God, 
for  no  restriction  is  admissible  in  it;  dependent  in  creatures, 
because  it  is  God's  gift,  and  confined  to  the  nature  he  has 
given:  that  nature  may  be  necessary  or  free;  its  energy  may 
be  ab  extra  or  ab  inira,  and  show  either  the  irresponsibility  of 
things,  or  the  accountability  of  persons. 

Consider  then  how  the  divine  acts  upon  things  and  per- 
sons. Things  are  influenced  by  those  forces  that,  corre- 
sponding with  their  nature,  invariably  bring  forth  the  same 
results  from  the  same  causes.  The  law  of  causality  in  things 
is  in  accordance  with  the  principle  of  necessity,  that  admits 
of  no  deviation,  no  change,  no  development  outside  of  that 
influence  that  uniformly  brings  about  like  results  from  like 
causes.  Things  always  demand,  in  all  action,  two  or  more 
conditions:  one  the  external  force  applied,  the  other  the  ob- 
ject which  receives  this  force.  There  must  not  only  be  two 
or  more  conditions,  but  a  corresponding   relation  between 


222  THE  HUMAN,  THE  SUPERHUMAN, 

them.  Thus  oil  and  water  do  not  mingle  or  combine,  but 
sugar  and  water  do.  But  when  we  come  to  persons  we  see 
the  law  of  causality  within. 

There  is  an  inherent  power  to  choose  between  motives,  to 
act  freely  from  any  motive,  to  resist  or  yield  to  any  influence 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  mind  by  motive.  A  person  is  self- 
caused,  he  is  made  a  rational  being,  and  this  means  the  ability 
to  take  up  with  right  or  wrong  motives.  But  a  person  could 
not  be  a  person  and  not  be  susceptible  to  motives  from  the 
Avorld  within  him  or  without  him  ;  he  could  not  be  a  person 
and  yet  a  passive  being,  with  a  constitution  where  motives 
could  have  no  power.  Things  are  not  the  objects  of  motives. 
We  do  not  reason  with  them,  we  cannot  converse  with  them, 
or  teach  them,  or  persuade  them.  There  is  an  impassable 
gulf  between  things  and  persons,  for  blind  force  is  at  an  in- 
finite remove  from  intelligent  force.  But  a  creature  could 
not  be  a  creature  and  yet  exempt  from  the  law  of  cause  and 
effect.  A  man  must  choose  something,  he  must  act  from 
some  kind  of  influence,  good  or  bad,  or  he  would  be  neither 
a  thing  nor  a  person,  and  this  would  be  an  absurdity.  The 
divine,  then,  when  it  comes  in  contact  with  the  human,  when 
a  supernatural  influence  is  made  to  bear  upon  the  mind,  is, 
unless  a  direct  miracle  is  worked,  always  in  accordance  with 
the  laws  of  the  mind,  giving  a  higher  energy,  or  a  new  di- 
rection, to  those  laws  acting  with  the  natural,  while  above 
it,  and  ordinarily  undistinguished  from  it;  but  in  no  true 
sense  can  such  action  of  the  human  be  appropriated  as  its 
own  exclusively.  The  divine  influence  that  secures  the  eflfect 
within  the  sphere  of  the  natural,  while  truly  above  it,  must 
be  considei-ed  the  procuring  cause  of  this  effect,  and  to  God 
alone  the  glory  belongs. 

It  will  be  seen  how  this  view  of  the  divine,  as  distin- 
guished from  the  human  or  the  superhuman,  gives  to  it  the 
noblest  aspect  when  made  the  object  of  human  desire  or 
effort.  If  the  human  never  acts  above  the  natural,  then  the 
supernatural  is  the  reason,  and  this  will  throw  the  great- 
est light  upon  the  whole  subject  of  inspiration,  and  teach  us 
that  what  distinguishes  the  Bible  above  all  other  books  is. 


AND    THE  DIVINE.  223 

that  it  carries  about  witli  it  the  ineffaceable  impress  of  the 
supernatural,  the  stamp  of  the  divine,  while  all  other  books 
are  the  offspring  of  the  natural. 

If  now  a  person  should  ask,  What  is  a  miracle  ?  we  reply, 
First,  it  is  not  a  natural  effect;  second,  it  does  not  lie  within 
the  sphere  of  the  human  or  the  superhuman  to  accomplish. 
An  angel  may  work  wonders,  and  do  that  which,  done  by  a 
man,  would  lead  immediately  to  the  inference  that  it  was 
supernatural  ;  but  this  action  of  the  angel  was  simply  super- 
human, above  that  which  a  man  could  do,  but  not  that  which 
an  angel  was  made  to  do.  As  human  beings,  we  might  not 
be  able  to  distinguish  between  supernatural  agency  and  super- 
human, but  as  angels  we  should,  for  then  we  would  be  con- 
scious of  acting  only  in  accordance  w^th  the  nature  God  has 
given  us.  When,  then,  we  get  beyond  the  domain  of  things, 
or  that  of  the  irresponsible  brute  creation,  we  come  to  that 
lofty  sphere  where  God  speaks  of  man  as  made  in  his  own 
image,  and  a  being  into  whose  nostrils  he  breathed  the  breath 
of  life.  Here  we  reach  the  condition  of  moral  accountability, 
and  that  of  persons  that,  however  varied  in  the  scale  of  crea- 
tion, do  yet  all  owe  allegiance  to  God,  and  by  him  are 
held  responsible  for  their  conduct. 

Thus  we  have  contemplated  the  human,  the  superhuman, 
and  the  divine,  for  the  great  object  of  showing  that  the  super- 
natural is  to  be  restricted  to  the  working  of  God  alone,  outside 
and  above  tlie  realm  of  nature,  and  then  to  show  that  the  law 
of  cause  and  effect  can  hold  as  true  in  the  spiritual  world  as  in 
the  material,  and  yet  be  perfectlj-  consistent  with  moral  free- 
dom, and  not  only  consistent  with  it,  but  the  foundation  upon 
which  it  must  rest,  and  the  only  principle  by  which  charac- 
ter can  be  formed  in  harmony  with  true  liberty  and  respon- 
sibility. Under  the  action  of  the  human  we  then  classify 
everything  that  comes  under  the  power  of  the  human  and 
its  laws.  Under  the  superhuman  we  mean  effects  produced 
by  powers  above  the  human,  and  yet  in  perfect  consistency 
with  their  nature,  and  according  to  natural  laws  imposed 
upon  superhuman  beings  by  God.  While  under  the  divine 
we  mean  always  the  supernatural,  and  that  which  God  only 


224  THE  HUMAN,  THE  SUPERHUMAN; 

can  do.  We  hold  this  distinction  of  the  greatest  value  in 
having  any  intelligent  idea  of  inspiration,  and  in  its  applica- 
tion to  the  great  themes  of  revelation.  We  believe  God 
made  both  men  and  angels  to  act  according  to  the  nature  he 
gave  them,  and  in  harmony  with  the  laws  of  their  being, 
and  therefore  all  such  action  must  be  natural,  always  except- 
ing those  cases  where  the  supernatural  is  interposed  to  help, 
or  control,  or  secure,  a  higher  end  than  the  inherent  powers 
of  their  own  natures  could -secure.  The  divine  coming  thus 
in  contact  with  the  human  or  the  angelic,  is  God's  own 
method  of  securing  in  nature  those  results  which  give  the 
highest  permanenc}^  and  glory  to  his  kingdom.  Miracle  is 
the  highest  method  of  the  supernatural,  and  will  only  appear 
when  needful  to  secure  effects  of  the  highest  value  in  the 
mind  of  God. 

What,  then,  is  sin  ?  It  is,  in  the  moral  world,  a  condition  of 
unnature,  a  perversion  of  moral  power,  a  spiritual  deformity, 
an  abhorrent  estrangement  from  those  laws  that,  obeyed, 
would  secure  everything  blessed  and  happy.  Sin  is  acting 
against  God,  against  his  system  of  nature,  against  his  will, 
against  his  order  of  creation,  an  insult  to  the  supreme  au- 
thorit}^  of  Jehovah,  and  an  abortive  effort  in  the  creature  to 
thwart  the  end  of  his  kingdom. 

What  is  sin  toward  self?  It  is  moral  suicide,  the  nourish- 
ing of  a  cancer  in  the  constitution,  that,  uncounteracted,  un- 
repented  of  and  unforgiven,  will  bring  with  it  death  to  the 
soul.  Sin  is  something  that  works  ruin  to  the  nature  as  cer- 
tain as  any  derangement  of  the  ph3'sical  system  :  rather,  sin 
is  a  derangement  affecting  both  soul  and  body,  and  must  be 
arrested  in  its  course,  or  irretrievable  ruin  is  the  result.  If 
this  is  sin,  we  see  why  the  interposition  of  the  divine,  in  hu- 
man affairs,  is  so  indispensable ;  and  why  miracle,  to  secure 
certain  ends  in  the  moral  recovery  of  man,  is  so  much  to  be 
desired. 

The  interposition  of  the  divine  in  human  affairs,  is  so  much 
the  necessity  of  man  a  sinner,  that  were  it  dispensed  with, 
we  should  see  no  hope  for  the  salvation  of  man. 

We  see,  then,  from  the  derangement  sin  has  introduced 


AND    THE  DIVINE.  225 

iuto  the  world,  from  the  disorder  cDgendered  by  it  in  the 
material  and  immaterial  creation  of  God,  how  essential  it  is 
for  reversing  this  fatal  tendency  of  evil  that  the  supernatural, 
under  all  its  varied  forms,  should  exist,  and  even  miracle  be 
sometimes  revealed  to  counteract  the  mischief  that  sin  would 
bring  upon  the  individual  or  society.  But  miracle  is  the 
manifestation  of  the  divine  power,  on  such  occasions  and 
under  such  circumstances  as  most  impressively  to  convince 
the  mind  that  God  does  what,  in  no  sense,  natural  law  could 
do  ;  that  even  there  is  a  suspension  or  setting  aside  of  the 
laws  of  nature,  and  the  clearly-defined  impress  of  the  work- 
ing of  a  Being  who  holds  all  laws  under  his  perfect  control, 
and  can,  with  infinite  ease,  bring  about  results  that  transcend 
all  creature  activity  or  wisdom.  Thus,  miracle  may  be  de- 
lined  as  the  highest  order  of  the  divine  power,  securing 
efl'ects  that  do  not  come  under  the  ordinary  sphere  of  the  su- 
pernatural, and  only  worked  upon  occasions  of  the  greatest 
importance  to  God.  Miracle,  then,  may  well  be  described  as 
something  more,  and  far  different  from  the  common  provi- 
dence of  God, — the  putting  forth  of  his  almightiness,  accord- 
ins:  to  the  method  of  his  own  wisdom,  and  which  is  concealed 
in  his  own  mind. 

Considering  the  supernatural  and  the  divine  as  synony- 
mous, and  miracle  as  the  especial  revelation  of  the  divine, 
we  are  compelled,  whenever  we  consider  the  terrible  disor- 
der of  sin  universal  over  the  earth,  to  admit,  under  a  personal 
God,  the  necessity  of  just  that  kind  of  interposition  to  relieve 
the  wants  of  the  human  family,  that  is  made  known  to  us  in 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  to  confess  that  miracle, 
under  the  circumstances  of  its  manifestation  as  recorded  in 
the  Bible,  is  peculiarly  suitable  and  appropriate  for  the  great 
end  of  human  redemption. 

Believing  in  miracle,  as  so  essential  in  the  restoration  of 
man  under  that  divine  system  disclosed  in  revelation,  we 
would,  for  this  very  reason,  look  with  the  greatest  suspicion 
upon  all  miracles  that  do  not  carry  upon  their  face  the 
evidences  of  the  Bible,  and  cannot  claim  for  their  working 
those  divine  proofs  that  give  to  real  miracles  their  credibility. 

15 


226         THE  HUMAN,  SUPERHUMAN,  AND  DIVINE. 

But  especially  would  we  make  heaven-wide  the  distinction 
that  separates  the  divine  power  from  the  human  or  the 
superhuman,  and  recognize  always  in  the  supernatural  that 
which  is  only  divine,  which  not  only  is  above  all  creature 
power,  but  is  as  far  removed  from  the  power  of  the  created 
as  the  nature  itself  of  the  infinite  is  removed  from  that  of 
finite. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

LIMITATIONS    OF   HUMAN   THOUGHT. 

The  proper  object  of  inquiry  for  the  human  mind  is  not 
so  much  what  is  the  subject-matter  of  nature  and  revelation, 
not  how  the  facts  presented  in  both  are  made  to  harmonize 
one  with  another,  as  what  is  the  character  of  the  human 
mind  and  the  essential  limitations  of  thought.  It  is  idle  to 
speculate  upon  worlds  beyond  the  range  of  the  telescope  : 
within  the  sphere  alone  of  its  power  can  the  astronomer  make 
his  calculations.     Facts  and  theories  are  widely  different. 

Consider,  then,  the  natural  limitations  of  the  mind  of  man, 
and  how  differently  individuals  are  affected  by  the  same  facts. 

The  consciousness  and  the  senses  are  the  two  great  instru- 
ments of  human  thought, — one  internal,  the  other  external. 
Take  away  any  of  the  senses,  and  the  mind  is  unable  to  com- 
prehend the  facts  that  properly  come  under  the  sense  that  is 
removed.  The  blind  man  can  have  no  idea  of  color,  or  the 
deaf  man  of  sound.  So  of  the  consciousness  :  while  unable  to 
define  it,  we  yet  know  that  the  different  degrees  of  reflection, 
reason,  judgment,  imagination,  as  well  as  the  different  states 
of  the  emotional  part  of  our  nature,  all  have  a  most  intimate 
connection  with  it,  and  give  to  its  action  clearness  or  am- 
biguity, strength  or  weakness.  The  first  thing  that  marks 
the  human  mind  is  its  variety  of  development  in  different 
persons.  No  two  persons  are  alike  in  their  minds  or  bodies. 
Some  have  minds  extremely  weak  and  some  strong ;  some 
excel  in  memory  and  some  in  judgment;  some  possess 
great  natural  powers  of  reflection  and  others  of  observation  ; 
some  show  great  inventive  faculties,  others  seem  only  able  to 
imitate.  The  texture  of  some  minds  is  coarse,  that  of  others 
refined.      Undoubtedly,  there  is  an    original  and  essential 

(22T) 


228  LIMITATIONS   OF 

difference  in  the  minds  of  different  persons.  Just  as  no  two 
trees  of  the  forest  are  alike,  and  no  two  blades  of  grass  are 
exactly  equal  in  shape,  or  color,  or  texture,  so  one  of  the 
clearest  marks  of  the  individuality  of  the  human  race  will  be 
found  in  the  variety  that  exists  among  all  who  people  this 
world.  This  being  so,  must  mould  the  ideas  of  every  per- 
son. The  same  facts  may  be  admitted,  but  there  cannot 
be  in  all  the  same  ideas  connected  with  those  facts.  The 
same  truth  may  be  confessed  by  two  persons,  and  yet  this 
truth  impress  the  consciousness  of  the  one  very  unlike  what 
it  does  the  other.  It  is,  then,  evident  that  this  difference  in 
the  minds  of  persons  arises  not  only  from  circumstances  in 
which  they  are  placed  from  education  and  the  force  of  habit, 
but  from  an  original  and  essential  variety  in  the  minds  of  all. 
The  natural  faculties  do  differ  in  strength,  energy,  compre- 
hension, and  acuteness  in  all  persons.  There  is  as  much 
a  gradation  in  the  scale  of  mind  as  in  that  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  body.  The  essential  distinctions  existing  in  the 
material  world  only  shadow  forth  distinctions  as  wide  and 
great  in  the  intellectual  and  moral  world,  and  these  distinc- 
tions all  are  consistent  with  personal  freedom  and  accounta- 
bility. The  mind  sympathizes  intimately  with  the  body ; 
they  mutually  act  and  react  upon  each  other.  This  being  so, 
the  inference  is  unavoidable,  that  different  persons  have  a 
limitation  in  their  ideas  respecting  material  and  immaterial 
things,  corresponding  with  the  original  and  essential  varieties 
of  mind  existing  in  the  world.  What  some  may  comprehend 
most  clearly,  others  may  not;  what  maybe  intuitively  ob- 
served by  some,  may  be  altogether  unseen  by  others.  Not 
the  mind  only,  but  the  emotional  part  of  the  nature,  is  widely 
affected  by  the  same  things  in  different  persons. 

Thus,  take  the  original  differences  in  the  human  faculties, 
and  then  those  differences  as  modified  or  increased  by  edu- 
cation and  habit,  and  we  see  the  widest  gradation  in  human 
thought  with  a  corresponding  limitation.  But  in  addition  to 
this  limitation  of  thought,  so  different  in  persons  of  the  same 
age,  there  is,  with  every  one,  a  peculiar  development  of  mind 
from  early  infiincy  to  old  age.     That  the  human  race  came 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  229' 

into  the  world  with  anything  that  may  be  called  innate  ideas 
it  is  impossible  to  prove ;  so  far  from  this,  there  is  very  clear 
evidence  to  the  contrary.  Faculty  and  idea  are  not  the 
same ;  faculties  of  thought,  perception,  and  feeling,  unde- 
veloped in  a  restricted  sense,  must  exist  in  infancy.  The 
senses  and  the  consciousness,  as  the  mere  instruments  of 
thought  and  feeling,  must  have  lying  back  a  nature,  with 
faculties  capable  of  thought  and  emotion  under  appropriate 
circumstances;  but  infancy  commences  with  no  ideas,  but 
simply  with  faculties  that,  under  certain  conditions  in  action, 
will  develop  thought  and  feeling.  JSTow,  the  process  of  human 
life  is  a  process  with  a  commencement  with  no  ideas,  but 
simply  original  faculties  of  emotion  and  thought,  gradually 
developing  into  specific  and  expanding  ideas  and  feelings. 

Thus,  we  see  not  only  in  different  persons  an  original 
limitation  of  mind,  as  diverse  as  individual  existence,  but  this 
limitation  diminishing  with  the  progress  of  infancy  into 
youth,  manhood,  and  maturity  of  life.  The  powers  of  the 
human  mind  strengthen,  and  the  mind  expands  with  the  in- 
crease of  years.  All  this  must  be  taken  into  consideration  in 
the  speculations  of  the  reason.  The  reasoning  power  in  one 
man  is  very  different  from  that  in  another,  and  then  it  is  also 
a  thing  of  gradual  development,  commencing  in  every  per- 
son with  only  faculties  in  a  crude  and  undeveloped  state : 
the  mind  shows  itself  absolute,  with  no  ideas  in  the  first 
dawning  of  its  existence,  for  faculty  and  ideas  are  not  the 
same,  no  more  than  the  flint  and  the  spark  that  is  struck  by 
concussion  from  it ;  and  then  there  is,  under  appropriate  con- 
ditions, a  growth  of  mind  as  striking  and  varied  as  the  growth 
of  the  body. 

Consider,  then,  the  limitations  of  the  mind  out  of  itself, — 
limitations  in  relation  to  God,  to  his  creation,  material  and 
immaterial.  Consider  the  simplest  ideas  with  the  individual. 
The  primar}'  idea  is  that  of  /,  a  person,  as  distinct  from  other 
persons  and  the  outward  world.  But  what  is  the  source  of 
this  idea  ?  Evidently  the  consciousness.  Suppose  the  rea- 
son attempts  to  prove  this  first  truth  of  our  existence.  Can 
anything  more  conclusive  be  ^•Ai^iho.n  I  think,  therefore  I  am? 


230  LIMITATIONS  OF 

And  yet  the  whole  force  of  this  argument  is  found  only  in  the 
individual  consciousness.  The  idea  of  distinct  personality  is 
traced  alone  to  the  same  source  :  from  our  idea  of  finite 
personality  we  ascend  to  the  idea  of  the  infinite  personality 
of  God.  The  great  axioms  of  all  truth,  or  rather  the  highest 
truth,  are  found  in  the  consciousness.  But  the  limitation  of 
our  minds  is  such  that  not  only  we  cannot  go  back  of  the 
consciousness  for  higher  proof,  we  must  take  its  decisions  just 
as  they  are,  without  imagining  that  any  effort  of  reasoning 
can  make  them  clearer.  The  great  facts  of  consciousness  by 
no  process  of  argument  can  be  improved  upon  :  rather,  elabo- 
rate speculations  only  tend  to  obscure  the  mind  respecting 
these  facts.  All  human  action  is  based  upon  the  admitted 
facts  of  consciousness,  teachingthe  great  truths  of  free  agency, 
of  accountability,  of  right  and  wrong.  And  yet,  what  limita- 
tion of  mind  in  respect  to  the  most  clearly  admitted  facts  of 
self-existence  !  Not  to  go  bej^ond  the  individual,  what  an 
impenetrable  veil  presents  itself  to  human  reason  in  that 
which  constitutes  the  essence  of  soul  and  body  !  This  is  just 
as  evident  when  we  consider  the  union  of  the  soul  and  body ; 
how  body  acts  upon  mind,  or  mind  upon  body ;  how  the 
spiritual  combines  with  the  material,  or  how  life  enters  into 
the  organism  of  the  human  frame, — all  is  as  unexplained  to 
the  mind  of  the  adult  as  to  that  of  the  infant.  The  one 
knows  just  as  much  of  their  mystery  as  the  other.  Let  a 
finite  mind  expand  ever  so  much,  let  it  grow  to  the  capacity 
of  a  Milton,  a  Newton,  or  a  Bacon,  and  it  will  be  found  that 
there  are  limitations  of  thought  in  every  person  never  to  be 
done  awaj'  with. 

But  this  is  more  evident  when  the  world  is  contem- 
plated. How  we  come  into  this  world,  live  in  it,  or  leave 
it,  beyond  the  apparent  outward  phenomena  of  life  and 
death,  are  subjects  of  the  profoundest  mystery.  We  see 
nothing  of  this  great  earth  beyond  the  contracted  horizon  of 
our  own  individual  consciousness  and  observation.  Our  own 
limited  thoughts  give  to  us  all  we  do  know  of  self  and  the 
outward  world ;  and  yet  think  how  extreme  is  our  limitation 
of  thought  in  respect  to  the  most  familiar  objects  of  sense. 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  231 

Take  the  bird :  we  know  something  of  its  shape,  color,  action, 
and  music.  We  open  its  body,  and  find  out  something  of  the 
mystery  wrapped  up  in  it ;  and  yet  in  this  bird  there  are  won- 
ders of  mechanism  beyond  the  reach  of  the  microscope.  Such 
is  the  limitation  of  our  minds  that  only  a  few  of  the  most 
obvious  properties  in  the  outward  world,  a  few  only  of  the 
most  sensible  exhibitions  of  brute  action,  ever  come  under 
our  inspection.  Men  have  neither  the  time  nor  the  capacity 
to  know  much  of  the  world  in  which  they  live.  Secrets 
innumerable  in  earth,  air,  and  water,  and  of  animate  and 
inanimate  creation,  exist  never  to  be  disclosed  to  human 
thought.  So  far  from  the  highest  researches  of  science  ex- 
hausting nature,  they  only  open  up  regions  inconceivably 
grander  of  wonder. 

Here,  then,  does  the  human  mind  show  its  limitation  as 
extreme,  not  only  in  the  world  comprehended  in  self,  but  in 
all  the  objects  of  the  external  world.  Nothing  but  the  mere 
surface  of  things  is  ever  known.  What  is  known  of  any  one 
thing  is  not  the  ten- thousandth  part  of  that  which  is  to  be 
known.  As  when  a  child  takes  a  watch  and  plays  with  the 
case  and  crystal,  and  admires  the  hands,  and  counts  the  little 
figures,  from  one  to  twelve,  marked  upon  the  dial-plate,  and 
then  thinks  he  knows  all  about  the  watch,  so  often  does  the 
vanity  of  the  human  mind  fancy  itself  posted  up  in  the 
knowledge  of  self  or  the  world,  when  only  there  has  been 
but  the  infant  playing  of  the  reason  with  a  few  of  the  outside 
properties  of  things. 

We  come  now  to  consider  objects  of  thought  inconceiva- 
bly grander  than  self,  or  the  world,  or  the  universe  of  worlds. 
We  enter  upon  the  contemplation  of  God ;  but  how  great  is 
the  limitation  of  the  mind  here!  Evidently  what  we  dO' 
know  of  God  must  be  what  he  pleases  to  make  known  to  us. 
As  the  distance  between  the  creature  and  the  Creator  is  infi- 
nite, so  also  the  limitation  of  mind  necessarily  implied  in  the 
finite  must  be  as  great.  God  reveals  himself  to  man  as  the 
First  Cause,  the  Absolute,  and  the  Infinite,  but  how  can  God, 
as  such,  be  comprehended  by  the  finite  ?  Certainly  only  in 
accordance  with  those  modes  of  manifestation  under  which 


232  LIMITATIONS  OF 

he  chooses  to  reveal  himself.  Now,  there  are  but  two  con- 
ceivable ways  of  the  mauifestatiou  of  God  to  man.  Either 
mail  must  ascend  up  to  God,  or  God  must  condescend  to 
man.  Either  the  finite  mind  must  rise  up  to  the  infinite  and 
merge  itself  into  the  infinite,  or  the  infinite  must  bring  him- 
self, so  far  as  he  can  be  known,  within  the  sphere  of  the  finite, 
and  come  under  human  limitation  so  far  as  is  consistent  with 
his  nature.  Now  the  finite  cannot  ascend  up  to  the  infinite, 
there  can  be  no  merging  of  the  creature  into  the  Creator. 

If  man  is  so  limited  in  thought  respecting  himself  and  the 
world,  infinitely  more  limited  is  he  in  relation  to  God.  If 
his  knowledge  of  self  and  nature  is  so  contracted,  then  what 
must  not  it  be  of  the  unlimited  God?  There  can  be  but  one 
way  in  which  God  in  any  sense  can  be  known  to  the  reason 
of  man :  that  way  must  be  the  descent  of  God  to  man,  com- 
ing to  man  as  far  as  suitable  under  human  limitations  within 
the  sphere  of  human  thought,  and  accommodated  to  the  in- 
fant capacities  of  his  creatures.  This  is  the  development  of 
God  in  revelation ;  but  what  does  this  lead  to  ?  Is  it  not 
that  the  first  study  of  man  should  be  what  is  the  actual  con- 
dition of  the  human  mind  as  related  to  the  great  facts  made 
known  in  nature  and  in  revelation  ?  The  first  study  of  the 
astronomer,  before  he  reasons  upon  the  stars,  is  the  character 
of  the  instrument  he  is  to  make  use  of  for  the  purpose  of 
observation  ;  he  can  know  only  that  which  comes  within  the 
range  of  the  telescope.  Should  the  finite  then  presume  to 
reason  upon  the  infinite  without  first  deciding  upon  its  own 
essential  limitation  of  thought  ?  Is  it  not  the  wildest  dream 
of  human  pride  to  think  of  merging  self  into  the  infinite, 
or  ascending  up  into  God  ?  Can  a  creature,  unable  even  to 
tell  what  is  comprehended  in  a  second  cause,  be  competent 
to  conceive  of  the  great  First  Cause? 

If  self-existence,  under  its  own  limitations,  is  a  mystery 
so  profound,  much  more  must  be  the  existence  of  the  Abso- 
lute, in  itself  infinitely  independent  of  all  creatures  and  all 
worlds.  But  if  the  only  way  in  which  God  in  any  true  sense 
can  be  known  to  the  human  mind,  is  by  accommodatino- 
himself  to  the  essential  limitations  of  the  mind,  then  the  in- 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  233 

ference  is  unavoidable,  that  whenever  the  human  reason  at- 
tempts to  go  beyond  its  own  true  sphere  of  thought  it  will 
show  its  folly  by  its  absurdity  and  contradiction.  In  other 
words,  the  true  province  of  the  reason  in  relation  to  God  is 
simY}\y  belief  in  great  facts  made  known.  The  proper  business 
of  the  reason  is  to  ascertain  what  God  has  said  respecting 
himself  and  man,  what  facts  has  he  communicated  to  man, 
and  what  are  the  evidences  of  a  divine  revelation  to  the  hu- 
man family.  The  reason  is  invited  to  make  the  most  of  all 
the  truth  made  known  in  nature  or  the  Bible  respecting  God. 
Whenever  it  attempts  to  erect  itself  into  a  self-constituted 
tribunal,  and  say  what  God  should  do  or  not  do,  what  he 
should  reveal  or  not  reveal,  what  facts  made  known  are  con- 
sistent with  his  attributes  and  what  are  not,  then  does  human 
reason  transcend  the  boundary  line  of  its  limitation.  What 
is  the  consequence?  Is  it  not  contradiction  in  theory,  and 
absurdity  in  practice  ? 

Certainly,  if  God  does  make  himself  known  to  us  in  any 
way,  he  will  not  previously  ask  the  advice  of  his  creatures. 
God  will  show  as  much  of  himself,  his  character,  and  perfec- 
tions, as  he  chooses  to  do,  and  no  more.  But  suppose  in  this 
world  he  permits  the  existence  of  sin,  of  disease,  of  death, 
and  of  innumerable  evils  affecting  man  in  his  physical  and 
moral  condition.  Suppose  directly  or  indirectly,  as  the  con- 
sequence of  sin,  all  nature  suffers,  and  disorder  and  pain 
more  or  less  abounds,  what  should  be  the  natural  inference? 
Is  it  not  that  all  these  evils,  external  and  internal,  have  a 
natural  tendency  to  bias  the  mind,  and  that,  in  addition  to 
the  limitation  of  human  thought,  we  must  add  also  the 
friction  of  sin,  and  view  man  not  only  in  the  essential  little- 
ness of  his  capacity,  but  even  in  the  derangement  of  that 
capacity  by  physical  and  moral  evil  ?  This  being  so,  there 
is  a  great  argument  for  caution  and  modesty  in  all  reason- 
ings upon  God,  his  attributes,  and  the  relation  he  sustains  to 
man.  Every  theory  of  the  mind  in  moral  reasoning  that 
does  not  take  into  account  the  friction  of  sin  will  be  essen- 
tially dejective. 

What  is  the  actual  condition  of  the  mind  in  every  effort 


234  LIMITATIONS  OF 

of  reason  to  understand  God  as  he  has  revealed  himself  to 
man  ?  This  is  the  first  inquiry  to  make,  for  just  as  we  have 
a  false  estimate  of  the  human  mind,  must  be  the  erroneous 
conception  of  God.  Is  it  possible  to  think  of  God  beyond 
the  range  of  human  thought?  If  God  in  any  sense  is  known, 
can  he  be  known  except  as  he  passes  within  the  sphere  of 
human  thought  ?  But  suppose  the  individual  consciousness 
and  mind  has  altogether  a  false  estimate  of  itself;  suppose 
it  vainly  thinks  its  own  vagaries  realities,  and  confounds  or 
overlooks  the  great  distinctions  of  right  and  wrong,  truth  and 
error;  suppose  the  mind  grovels  in  sensuality,  or  is  intoxi- 
cated with  the  dreams  of  pride, — must  not  all  this  be  taken 
into  account  in  its  decisions  respecting  God?  If  the  lens  of 
a  telescope  is  defaced,  will  it  not  affect  all  the  observations 
of  the  astronomer?  But  when  the  calculations  are  found 
wrong,  are  the  stars  at  fault,  or  the  instrument  used  to 
observe  them  ? 

There  is  a  twofold  limitation  of  thought  in  all  reasoning 
upon  God — that  which  is  the  result  of  original  contraction,  and 
that  vitiation  of  mind  the  natural  consequence  of  sin.  The 
difliculty  lies  not  so  much  in  the  former  as  the  latter.  The 
finite  is  the  essential  condition  of  all  creatures,  and  it  has  a 
scale  of  gradation  from  the  archangel  to  the  worm,  from 
moral  agents,  responsible  and  free,  to  the  minutest  insect. 
But  God  makes  himself  known  in  a  way  corresponding  to 
the  nature  he  has  given  to  his  creatures.  To  a  large  part 
of  his  creation  he  does  not  choose  to  make  himself  known 
in  any  manner.  God  gives  to  brute  animals  just  those  kind 
of  faculties  that  enable  them  to  carry  out  the  limited  end  of 
their  existence.  In  their  own  sphere,  so  diverse,  they  live 
and  die  with  a  nature  corresponding  alone  to  the  wants  of 
their  contracted  existence. 

But  whatever  may  be  the  limitations  of  human  thought, 
they  do  not  exclude  conscience  and  responsibility  in  the  hu- 
man family,  since  their  existence  is  not  only  for  time  but 
eternity.  And  yet  the  saddest  thing  connected  with  man- 
kind is  the  vitiation  of  their  nature  by  sin.  God  does  in- 
deed condescend  to  man,  and  accommodates  himself  to  his 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  235 

nature ;  but  mau,  by  the  abuse  of  his  free  agency,  has  made 
himself  sinful,  otherwise  there  would  be  no  error  respecting 
God  as  he  reveals  himself  to  human  limitation.  What 
could  be  made  known  would  never  be  mistaken,  but  clearly 
believed  in  and  acted  upon  ;  while  that  which  should  tran- 
scend the  range  of  that  limitation  would  be  simply  let  alone 
as  wrong  to  intrude  into.  But  the  tendency  of  sin  in  the 
mind  is  to  make  it  bold  where  it  should  be  timid,  and  timid 
w^here  it  should  be  bold.  It  reverses  all  the  natural  order  of 
things.  Instead  of  contenting  itself  with  that  which  it  may 
know,  it  seeks  to  find  out  that  which  it  cannot  know.  The 
world  is  teeming  with  great  facts,  and  God,  by  the  direct 
manifestation  of  his  mind  to  man,  is  making  known  things 
of  transcendent  importance  to  understand;  and  yet  the  folly 
of  the  human  mind  in  no  respect  is  more  manifest  than  in 
passing  over  the  sensible,  the  near,  and  the  everyday  facts 
of  existence,  and  rashly  speculating  upon  the  Divine  Being, 
as  if  the  finite,  the  fallible,  the  weak,  and  the  sinful  was  able 
to  grasp  in  thought  the  infinite,  the  absolute,  the  omnipres- 
ent and  omnipotent  First  Cause. 

Thus,  the  curse  of  sin  is  seen  either  in  man  groveling  in 
the  mire  of  sensuality,  and  not  caring  to  think  of  God  at  all, 
or  it  makes  itself  known  in  an  insane  pride  that  imagines  it 
can  raise  itself  to  God.  But  God  only  reveals  himself  in  a 
w^ay  corresponding  to  the  nature  he  gives  to  his  creatures. 
What  is  more  clear  than,  if  this  is  so,  that  the  essential  lim- 
itation of  the  human  mind  would  make  it  necessary  to  be- 
lieve much  that  could  not  be  understood,  and  submit  to  much 
that  must  ever  be  unavoidable.  For  the  very  reason  that 
the  finite  cannot  comprehend  the  infinite,  or  that  the  absolute 
and  self-existent  could  not  be  known  by  the  limited  mind  of 
man;  for  the  very  reason  that  all  creatures  who  are  but 
second  causes,  are  peculiarly  dependent  upon  the  First  Cause, 
is  it  not  certain  that  all  the  speculations  of  philosophy  must 
be  wrecked  whenever  they  venture  beyond  the  legitimate 
limits  of  human  thought? 

But  consider  some  of  those  characteristics  of  the  human 
mind  that  give  the  note  of  warning  whenever  it  attempts  to 


236  LIMITATIONS  OF 

transgress  its  prescribed  limits.  First,  whatever  the  mind 
does  know  it  knows  almost  exclusively  in  the  way  of  simple 
facts.  This  is  true  of  all  the  familiar  objects  of  sense  that 
daily  come  under  the  observation  of  man,  and  even  this 
knowledge  is  confined  alone  to  the  surface  of  facts.  Thus, 
the  mind  knows  the  existence  of  the  ocean,  its  vastness,  its 
color,  its  saltness,  and  motion ;  and  yet  what  mysteries  un- 
known in  the  ocean  !  Thus,  the  mind  knows  that  there  is 
such  a  thing  as  the  human  body ;  to  reason  a  man  out  of 
this  belief  is  impossible.  But  what  do  we  know  of  the  bodies 
we  every  moment  carry  about  with  us,  except  a  few  of  the 
most  sensible  properties  of  the  human  system?  So  of  the 
earth  and  air.  Ages  have  passed  over  the  human  race,  and 
slowly  accessions  of  knowledge  have  been  made  respecting 
earth  and  air ;  but  what  proportion  does  the  known  bear  to 
the  unknown  ?  So  also  of  rain,  snow,  sky,  lightning,  and 
heat,  there  is  vastlj'  more  to  be  known  than  is  known. 

But  if  this  is  so  of  the  most  apparent  things  in  nature, 
what  must  we  not  infer  respecting  the  mind  of  man,  and  es- 
pecially God  !  Is  it  not  evident  that  God  in  his  infinite  per- 
fections can  be  known  only  as  he  reveals  himself  within  the 
sphere  of  human  thought?  But  what  must  be  the  inference 
respecting  such  knowledge?  Is  it  not  that  it  must  not  only 
be  accommodated  to  our  mental  limitation,  but  that  it  will 
be  given  to  us  more  for  the  regulation  of  our  conduct  in  this 
world  than  to  gratif}^  the  curiosity,  more  as  a  matter  of  be- 
lief than  mere  reason,  more  for  good  living  than  for  specu- 
lation ?  Remember  that  for  practice  a  right  belief  subserves 
all  the  purpose,  and  far  better  than  elaborate  research  of 
thought  or  profound  reasoning.  Belief  is  a  short  process, 
available  at  every  emergency  of  life  ;  but  a  man  may  die  be- 
fore he  gets  through  with  his  reasoning:  nor  can  human 
action  wait  long  upon  the  lagging  and  uncertain  footsteps  of 
speculation.  All  right  conduct  need  ask  for  is  a  right  belief. 
And  yet  an  axiom  of  life,  universally  practiced  about  things 
of  this  world,  is  discarded  where  God  is  concerned.  In  no 
respect  is  the  insanity  of  human  pride  more  seen  than  in 
presuming  to  dictate  to  God  how  he  should  make  himself 
known  to  the  reason. 


HUMAN   THOUGHT.  237 

But  suppose  he  only  discloses  to  man  great  facts  in  his 
government;  suppose  he  chooses  to  present  his  truth  to  lis 
more  in  the  way  of  assertion  than  argument,  more  under 
the  aspect  of  simple  declaration  than  by  any  attempt  to 
gratify  the  reason;  suppose  God  tells  us  v)}iat  he  is,  rather 
them  how  he  is  ;  suppose  he  consults  no  one  method  of  human 
reason,  either  in  the  time,  the  way,  or  the  character  of  his 
great  remedy  for  the  moral  disease  of  man  ;  sujjpose  his 
revelation  is  exclusively  confined  to  the  specific  end  of  secur- 
ing right  conduct, — will  the  human  mind  dare  assert  that 
God  should  not  do  so?  As  the  human  race  consists  of  men, 
women,  and  children,  with  only  a  brief  span  of  life,  and  vast 
issues  hanging  upon  the  improvement  of  their  time ;  as  all 
ought  to  believe  right,  does  not  the  very  course  God  takes  to 
make  himself  known  to  man,  show  infinite  wisdom  as  accom- 
modated not  only  to  the  limited  sphere  of  human  thought, 
but  also  the  sinfulness  existing  in  that  sphere  ?  There  is  no 
difficulty  in  revelation  that  does  not  find  its  counterpart  in 
nature.  There  are  no  peculiar  obscurities  in  the  facts  of  the 
Bible  that  are  not  equally  evident  in  the  facts  of  the  physical 
world.  Nothing  lies  so  far  beyond  the  range  of  human 
thought  as  the  great  law  of  cause  and  effect.  The  process  of 
all  right  reason  is  from  the  known  to  the  unknown,  from  the 
evidence  of  the  seen  and  the  felt  to  the  belief  of  that  unseen, 
and,  as  yet,  unfelt.  But  it  is  reversing  all  right  reason  to  go 
out  of  the  sphere  of  human  thought  to  explain  that  within  its 
sphere.  The  human  mind,  with  a  capacity  extremely  limited, 
must  content  itself  with  simple  facts  and  great  axioms  of 
moral  truth  declared  by  God.  Nothing  is  so  fatal  to  all  true 
belief,  even  as  all  right  reason,  as  to  pretend  to  decide  upon 
that  which  it  cannot  know,  or  to  reject  that  which  bears  the 
stamp  of  the  inspiration  of  God.  Thus,  take  the  divine  pur- 
poses and  the  free  agency  of  man,  viewed  alone  as  great  facts 
made  known  in  nature  and  revelation,  and  no  difficulty  need 
present  itself  in  relation  to  these  facts  more  perplexing  than 
in  other  facts.  But  suppose  the  philosopher  attempts  to 
reason  them  out,  and  show  how  they  both  harmonize  with 
each   other :    what  is   the   result?     In  the  very  process  of 


238  LIMITATIONS   OF 

human  reasou  there  is  a  limit  passed,  where,  to  proceed  one 
step  farther,  is  plainly  impossible.  The  dilficulty  lies  not  so 
much  in  the  separate  facts  as  in  the  attempt  to  blend  them 
together. 

But  why,   at  a  certain   point,    must   all    reasoning   stop, 
or  involve   itself   in    absurdity   and   contradiction  ?      Why 
does  the  imperative  mandate  of  the  individual  consciousness 
say.  Thus  far  shalt  thou  go,  and  no  farther?     Evidently  be- 
cause  the   finite  cannot   comprehend  the  infinite ;  because 
there  is  an  essential  limitation  of  thought,  beyond  which  all 
thought  falters.     Suppose  there  may  be  an  apparent  contra- 
diction in  the  efibrt  to  blend  together  God's  purposes  and 
free  moral  agency  :  are  either  of  these  great  facts  to  be  de- 
nied?    The  contradiction   that  appears  to  the  mind  arises 
alone  from  its  limitation.      What  appears  to  infringe  upon 
these  facts  only  confirms  them.     For  why  this  failure  of  th-e 
mind  to  show  how  both,  by  God,  are  made  to  coalesce  to- 
gether, while  the  action  of  each  is  separate  and  independ- 
ent?   Why  are  we  compelled  to  admit  the  facts,  and  yet 
find  the  reason  unable  to  reconcile  them  in  their  joint  ex- 
istence ?     Is   it  that    God   has   given   to   us  a  reason  only 
to   confound  it?     Is  it  that  there  is  any  real  contradiction 
in    the   action    of   the    divine    purposes    and    free    moral 
agency  ?     Is  one  naturally  opposed  to  the  other  ?     Not  in  the 
least!  there  is  no  real  antagonism  in  the  blending  together 
of  the  two.     They  act  in  perfect  harmony  with  each  other ; 
both  are  essential,  both  true,  and  while  there  is  a  dependence 
of  one  upon  the  other,  it  is  not  a  dependence  that  in  the 
least  infringes  upon  the  sphere  of  either.     Why,  then,  the 
more  we  reason   upon  the  mode  of  the  joint  existence  of 
both,  is  there  an  apparent  contradiction,  so  that  the  full  ad- 
mission of  one  seems  to  preclude  the  existence  of  the  other  ? 
All  this  arises  from  the  inherent  limitation  of  the  mind,  and 
the  impossibilit}'  beyond  a  certain  line  of  having  the  least  idea 
or  knowledge  of  the  infinite  God.      When  the  bird  flies  too 
high  in  the  air,  its  motion  becomes  weak  and  unsteady,  and 
it  must  soon  descend  to  a  region  adapted  to  its  nature.     So 
of  the  reason :  when  it  attempts  to  fly  too  high  into   the 


HUMAN   THOUGHT.  239 

mystery  of  the  divine  action  and  being,  its  very  weakness 
shows  itself  in  absurdity  and  contradiction. 

As  facts  made  known,  man's  free  moral  agency  and  God's 
purposes  are  most  evident;  but  they  are  evident  as  facts  to  be 
credited  and  acted  upon,  not  as  theories  to  be  reasoned  out 
and  demonstrated.  Where  is  it  that  the  difficulty  shows 
itself  when  the  mind  of  man  attempts  by  any  process  of  rea- 
son to  blend  together  in  one  harmonious  theory  the  union  of 
God's  purposes  and  man's  free  moral  agency  ?  Precisel}' 
where  the  finite  passes  the  line  of  its  limitation  and  intrudes 
into  the  infinite.  It  is  evident  there  is  the  finite,  and  equally 
evident  there  is  the  infinite  ;  but  who  can  explain  their  joint 
existence  or  reconcile  it  to  the  reason  ?  Denying  the  finite, 
we  merge  into  pantheism;  denying  the  infinite,  we  plunge 
into  atheism;  and  either  error  destroys  free  moral  agency. 
Suppose  we  admit  the  finite  and  the  infinite,  but  deny  the 
divine  purposes :  what  kind  of  God  do  we  make  that  has  a 
mind  without  a  purpose,  an  intelligence  without  a  will, 
thought  without  intention,  existence  without  wish,  and  per- 
ception without  choice  ?  If  a  man  cannot  be  deprived  of 
purpose  and  yet  be  a  man,  could  God  lose  his  purposes  and 
yet  be  God  ? 

But,  says  an  objector,  I  cannot  reconcile  the  joint  action  of 
man's  free  agency  with  God's  purposes.  The  existence  of 
one  seems  to  conflict  with  that  of  the  other.  But  is  it  not 
evident  that  what  we  are  unable  to  comprehend  should  seem 
contradictory  ?  Is  there  greater  difficulty  of  comprehension 
in  this  than  in  the  joint  action  of  thought  and  matter,  spirit 
and  body  ?  But  the  joint  existence  of  thought  and  matter, 
spirit  and  body,  cannot  be  denied  because  of  their  apparent 
contradiction.  Neither  free  agency  nor  the  divine  purposes 
can  be  invalidated  because  of  the  seeming  inconsistency  of 
their  joint  existence.  Apparent  contradictions  are  not  real 
ones.  The  Infinite  can  only  be  known  as  he  condescends  to 
the  limitation  of  human  thought. 

The  whole  doctrine  of  the  incarnation  of  Christ  is  emi- 
nently consistent  with  this  view.  The  incarnation  is  revealed 
as  a  simple  fact  to  be  believed,  not  a  speculation  to  be  rea- 


240  LIMITATIONS   OF 

soiled  upon.  What  has  reason  to  do  with  that  which,  like 
the  infinite,  is  impossible  to  be  conceived  of?  Says  an  ob- 
jector, The  incarnation  is  incomprehensible,  and  therefore 
impossible.  Yes !  the  incarnation  is  impossible  to  be  con- 
ceived of  by  men,  because  it  is  as  high  above  man  as  the 
infinite  is  above  the  finite ;  but  is  it  therefore  impossible  to 
God  ?  Cannot  God  bring  this  about,  even  if  the  compre- 
hension of  this  truth  is  impossible  to  man  ?  The  incarnation 
of  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  is  the  manifestation  of  the  wisdom 
of  God  to  man  in  its  highest  and  noblest  aspect. 

It  is  this  great  doctrine  that  tells  us  in  the  clearest  manner 
that  when  God  makes  himself  known  to  man,  when  espe- 
ciall}-  he  has  some  great  purpose  of  mercy  in  view,  he  does  it 
in  that  way  which  corresponds  with  the  nature  of  man  and 
his  wants.  It  is  the  descent  of  God,  so  far  as  is  suitable, 
into  the  sphere  of  man  and  into  the  region  of  his  limitation; 
and,  therefore,  it  is  the  assumption  of  that  very  limitation 
necessary  for  the  welfare  of  the  human  race.  But  are  any  to 
imagine  that  God  is  finite  or  limited,  because  he  takes  upon 
himself  those  limitations  absolutely  necessary  for  accommo- 
dating himself  to  the  contracted  sphere  of  human  compre- 
hension and  human  action?  Will  any  take  advantage  of 
this  to  attribute  infirmity  to  God,  because  he  condescends  to 
the  infirmity  of  man  ?  Wlien  Christ  said,  "  He  that  hath  seen 
me  hath  seen  the  Father,"  is  it  not  obvious  that  Christ  speaks 
only  under  the  restriction  of  human  limitation  ?  Is  not  the 
same  great  truth  announced  in  other  words,  when  Christ 
declares  to  Thomas,  "  If  ye  had  known  me,  ye  should  have 
known  ray  Father  also"  ?  This  is  all  consistent  with  those 
other  assertions  in  the  Bible,  where  God  speaks  of  himself 
as  impossible  to  be  seen,  as  the  infinitely  unknown.  In  the 
one  case,  God  speaks  of  himself  as  beyond  the  sphere  of 
human  thought;  in  the  other  case,  as  condescending  to  come 
within  the  range  of  the  limitation  of  man.  The  great  truth 
of  the  incarnation  of  Christ,  is  God  revealing  himself  under 
human  limitations,  the  infinite  entering  the  sphere  of  the 
finite ;  but  this  very  condescension  adds  inconceivably  to  the 
glory  of  God,  rather  it  is  that  glory,  unlimited  and  eternal, 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  241 

coming  under  the  restrictions  essential  in  the  finite,  not 
diminished,  but,  under  the  loveliest  aspect  of  mercy,  conform- 
ing to  that  limitation  inherent  in  the  contracted  sphere  of 
human  thought  and  action.  Yet  this  very  condescension  of 
God  is  made  the  occasion  of  innumerable  objections  to  the 
plain  facts  of  the  Bible.  But  has  it  come  to  this,  that  either 
God  in  no  sense  shall  be  known,  or,  if  known  as  far  as  hu- 
man limitation  will  permit,  this  very  knowledge  is  to  be 
made  the  excuse  for  denying  his  infinite  perfections  and  pur- 
poses of  wisdom  and  grace,  or  man's  free  moral  agency? 

In  no  sense  is  the  limitation  of  the  human  mind  more  seen 
than  in  the  errors  fallen  into  in  the  theories  advocated  of  the 
first  cause  and  second  causes,  existence  uncreated  and  exist- 
ence created,  the  duration  of  mind  and  matter,  time  and  eter- 
nity. Yet  it  is  certain  that  God  existed  from  eternity,  and  as 
certain  that  matter  and  mind  created  is  finite.  But  either 
matter  and  mind  are  derived  from  God,  or  they  are  not.  If 
we  say  they  are  parts  of  God,  originating  from  his  substance, 
then  we  fall  into  pantheism,  and  pantheism  is  fatal  to  all  hu- 
man responsibility.  If  we  say  the  finite  does  not  originate 
from  the  infinite,  then  something  comes  from  nothing,  that 
which  is  proceeds  from  that  which  is  not.  Here  creation, 
which  is  exclusively  the  work  of  God,  plunges  the  reason  into 
difficulties  from  which  faith  only  can  extricate  the  mind.  If 
God  is  the  Absolute,  the  First  Cause,  the  Infinite,  then  in 
any  way  to  make  the  finite,  the  derived,  or  any  begun  exist- 
ence of  mind  or  matter  originating  from  God,  does  conflict 
with  the  fact  of  creation  in  the  production  of  something  from 
nothing.  Creation  is  as  much  beyond  the  reason  of  man  as 
the  existence  of  the  infinite.  Man  must  believe  it  as  a  fact 
without  explanation,  or  in  the  very  effort  to  explain  it  the 
mind  rushes  into  pantheism  or  atheism.  Say  that  the  world 
is  a  part  of  God,  derived  from  him ;  say  that  the  human 
mind  is  an  emanation  of  the  divine  mind,  and  pantheism,  with 
its  denial  of  second  causes  and  responsibility,  follows;  say 
that  the  universe  is  God,  in  the  sense  that  nothing  exists  but 
this,  and  atheism  is  the  result,  and  with  it,  as  with  pantheism, 
there  is  the  denial  of  free  agency  and  human  responsibility. 

16 


242  LIMITATIONS  OF 

Thus,  many  a  noble  miucl  has  been  wrecked  in  fruitless 
speculations  to  solve  the  difficulties  involved  in  the  existence 
of  the  absolute  and  the  created,  the  underived  and  the  finite, 
the  self-existent  and  existence  begun ;  but,  other  than  as 
facts  made  known,  there  can  be  no  knowledge  of  these 
things.  To  know  the  great  things  involved  in  the  existence 
of  God  and  in  creation,  the  finite  capacity  of  man  must  en- 
large itself  to  an  infinite  capacity,  or  man  must  become  God. 
But  what  absurdity  in  the  idea  !  Yet  this  very  contradiction 
of  mind, — arising  from  abortive  attempts  to  convert  nature 
into  God,  or  God  into  nature  ;  to  construct  a  theory  that  shall 
tell  how  mind  or  matter  exists  ;  how  the  infinite  exists  without 
the  finite,  or  the  finite  without  the  infinite  ;  how  creation  is 
possible  or  impossible  ;  how  the  derived  comes  from  the  un- 
derived, or  how  only  one  exists, — this  confounding  second 
causes  with  the  First  Cause,  all  show  that  some  fatal  per- 
versity of  unbelief  has  taken  hold  of  the  mind. 

In  all  reasoning  from  the  personality  of  man  to  the  per- 
sonality of  God,  the  limitation  of  the  human  mind  is  pecu- 
liarly seen.  From  finite  personality  we  ascend  to  the  idea 
of  infinite  personality.  But  the  personality  of  man  involves 
not  only  individuality,  a  person  distinct  from  all  other  per- 
sons, but  a  local  habitation  for  the  soul,  a  sphere  of  existence 
restricted  and  an  essential  limitation  in  the  mode  of  human 
life.  Finite  personality  has  a  finite  sphere"  of  existence  and 
development;  in  that  sphere  it  is  self-conscious;  in  its  rela- 
tions to  the  world  it  is  altogether  dependent ;  its  very  life 
and  happiness  must  flow  from  its  connection  with  that  which 
is  out  of  it  and  above  it.  But  the  personality  of  God  is  in- 
finite, unlimited,  self-existent,  and  independent;  its  action 
and  happiness  are  in  itself;  perfect  independence  and  absolute 
freedom  are  its  peculiar  character.  The  personality  of  God 
makes  him  in  every  respect  essentially  distinct  from  the  uni- 
verse. This  personality  of  God,  with  his  infinite  attributes 
of  wisdom,  power,  goodness,  and  knowledge,  is  underived, 
and  therefore  is  the  peculiar  feature  of  the  Absolute  and  the 
First  Cause.  Because  from  the  known  we  infer  the  unknown, 
or  because  we  believe  from  our  own  conscious  personality  in 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  243 

the  personality  of  God,  is  it  not  the  extreme  of  folly  to 
assert  that  God's  personality  in  all  respects  resembles  our 
own  ?  Yet  this  great  mistake  is  the  source  of  all  the  contro- 
versy that  arises  in  disputing  the  revealed  fact  of  the  triune 
existence  of  God,  comprehending  his  essential  unity  of  being 
with  three  persons, — the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

But  evidentlj'  what  constitutes  tlie  whole  of  the  personality 
of  God  is  not  within  the  sphere  of  the  human  mind  to  com- 
prehend ;  if,  as  a  fact,  it  is  made  known  that  God  is  one  being 
and  yet  three  persons,  that  fact  is  to  be  believed  in  from  the 
testimony  of  the  sacred  Scriptures.  But,  says  an  objector, 
the  word  person,  when  used  in  relation  to  man,  always  means 
one  distinct  being,  and  therefore  three  persons  in  tlie  God- 
head must  mean  three  distinct  beings.  This  does  not  follow. 
If  the  objector  could  comprehend  the  infinite,  he  might  then 
be  competent  to  say  whether  there  is  a  real  contradiction  in 
the  doctrine  of  Trinitarians;  he  might  then  be  prepiired  to 
question  the  consistency  of  this  threefold  personality  with 
the  unity  of  the  Godhead.  But  as  the  objector  is  finite  in 
mind  and  existence,  how  can  he  insist  upon  his  own  theorj^ 
as  true  if  it  conflicts  with  the  plain  assertions  of  the  Bible  ? 
Does  the  same  thing  of  necessity  follow  in  the  infinite  being 
of  God  that  does  follow  in  the  limited  existence  of  man  ? 
Suppose  one  person  means  in  a  finite  sphere  one  being,  and 
three  persons  three  beings,  must  the  same  logic  be  applied 
to  the  infinite  God?  Until  the  mode  of  the  divine  existence 
is  known  in  its  height  and  length  and  breadth  and  depth, 
is  it  not  presumption  to  assert  that  what  happens  to  be  true 
in  a  finite  relation  is  alone  true  in  the  infinite,  the  absolute, 
and  the  First  Cause?  Is  the  limited  capacity  of  man  com- 
petent to  bring  the  charge  of  tritheism  against  those  who 
hold  to  the  doctrine  that  there  is  but  one  God  and  yet  three 
persons  in  the  Godhead  ?  What  if,  in  reasoning  from  human 
personality  to  the  divine  personality,  there  is  an  apparent 
contradiction  ?  Does  not  this  follow  from  the  essential 
limitation  of  the  human  faculties  ? 

The  whole  sul)ject  is  one  altogether  beyond  the  grasp  of 


244  LIMITATIONS   OF 

tlie  compreliension  of  man,  and  it  is  to  be  credited  as  a  fact 
revealed,  with  no  attempt  to  explain  it.  For,  until  all  that 
enters  into  divine  personality  is  comprehended,  there  is  an 
obvious  impossibility  in  asserting  that  the  threefold  person- 
ality of  God  is  inconsistent  with  his  divine  unity.  Tritheism 
does  not  follow  because  the  doctrine  is  held  of  three  persons 
in  the  Godhead,  and  it  does  not  follow  simpl}^  because  a  pro- 
cess of  reasoning  that  would  be  correct  in  relation  to  man  in 
his  linite  capacity  is  not  of  necessity  so  when  applied  to  the 
infinite,  the  absolute,  and  the  First  Cause.  In  the  nature  of 
things,  the  union  of  the  human  and  the  divine  natures,  and 
the  doctrine  of  three  persons  in  one  God,  must,  to  be  con- 
ceived of  in  any  sense,  co-me  under  the  limitations  of  human 
thought;  but  we  are  not  to  attach  our  own  limitations  to  God, 
because  in  the  way  of  accommodation  to  the  infirmities  of 
our  faculties  God  reveals  himself.  If  to  be  known  at  all, 
God  must  be  known  wathin  the  sphere  of  the  finite;  then  let 
us  be  thankful  for  such  knowledge,  let  us  humbly  submit 
our  reason  and  hearts  to  it,  and  not  pervert  the  divine  conde- 
scension into  an  arrogant  denial  of  revealed  facts.  These 
facts  are  not  changed  hy  any  imperfection  in  our  own  minds, 
nor  do  they  infringe  upon  the  infinite  perfection  of  God,  but 
they  are  given  to  us  for  right  conduct,  for  more  than  curious 
speculation, — for  the  trial  of  faith  rather  than  reason. 

There  are  many  difliculties  that  are  presented  in  the  con- 
sideration of  facts  made  known  respecting  the  divine  govern- 
ment, probation,  heaven  and  hell;  but  these  difficulties  also 
grow  from  the  limitations  of  human  thought,  they  are  shown 
as  much  in  contemplating  that  which  God  declares  he  will  do 
as  in  that  which  pertains  to  the  mode  of  his  existence.  Con- 
sider how  w^e  come  into  this  world,  and  what  we  are  while 
we  live  in  it.  IIow  does  the  mind  develop  itself  from  infancy  ? 
Is  not  its  growth  slow,  vitiated,  and,  through  wn-ong  habit  or 
association,  subject  to  great  perversion?  Here  then  is  the 
finite,  emerging  under  the  thousand  perverting  influences  of 
sin,  contemplating  God  as  made  known. 

But  is  not  the  inference  correct  that  God  can  only  be  most 
inadequately  apprehended,  either  in  his  character  or  in  his 


HUMAN  THOUGHT.  245 

government  ?  Is  it  not  certain  tliat  manj^  difficulties  will 
present  themselves  from  the  position  of  man  in  his  relation 
to  God  ?  Does  it  therefore  follow  that  facts  made  known  re- 
specting what  God  does  or  will  do,  are  inconsistent  or  contra- 
dictory because  they  may  appear  so  under  the  perverting  in- 
fluences of  sin  ?  Is  it  not  certain  that  the  limitations  of 
human  thought  will  experience  also  a  kind  of  deceptiou  that 
arises  from  a  person  ignorant  of  those  limits  beyond  which 
the  mind  cannot  go  ?  Facts  are  stubborn  things  that  do  not 
bend  to  our  theories.  We  may  think  them  very  contradic- 
tory :  we  may  say  that  if  one  kind  of  facts  is  true,  another  is 
not  true;  we  may  say  we  cannot  reconcile  this  fact  with  a 
different  fact  made  known, — but  all  will  be  of  no  use.  It  is 
quite  probable  that  as  much  contradiction  will  arise  in  the 
mind  respecting  what  God  says  he  tvill  do  as  in  relation  to 
what  God  says  he  is.  It  is  quite  probable  that  the  human 
mind  in  its  limitations  will  be  often  severely  perplexed  in  all 
reasoning  about  the  facts  of  the  divine  government  and  the 
issues  of  this  short  probation.  There  is  a  cause  for  this  in 
that  finite  capacity  that  cannot  take  in  all  the  reasons  for 
God's  conduct. 

God  must  in  himself  have  many  reasons  for  what  he  does 
that  he  will  not  see  tit  to  communicate, — reasons  that  exoner- 
ate him  from  the  charge  of  partiality  or  injustice,  and  which 
are  concealed  in  his  own  infinite  being.  But  more  than  this, 
it  is  certain  that  God  may  have  reasons  for  what  he  does  that 
could  not  be  comprehended  if  made  known, — reasons  that  lie 
altogether  beyond  the  finite  capacity,  and  that  are  a  rule  to 
him,  while  they  may  be  no  rule  to  us.  The  natural  presump- 
tion respecting  a  revelation  of  God's  will  to  man  is,  that  it 
will  be  regulative  rather  than  speculative ;  more  to  secure 
right  action  than  to  favor  the  reason.  While  God  will  not 
treat  the  reason  wnth  contempt,  he  certainly  will  teach  it  its 
true  place  before  him, — he  will  encourage  its  development 
but  not  its  presumption. 

Thus  we  find  it.  The  whole  import  of  the  gospel  to  man 
is  to  teach  man  how  to  live  well  and  how  to  be  saved,  but 
beyond  this  very  little  is  said  for  the  mere  gratification  of  the 


246  LIMITATIONS  OF  HUMAN  THOUGHT. 

mind.  Yet  objections  in  relation  to  God's  government,  and 
especially  the  puni|liment  denounced  against  the  wicked,  have 
often  been  made.  Either  the  truth  of  God's  threatenings 
against  sin  has  been  denied,  or  the  mind  has  rebelled  against 
God  as  acting  unworthy  of  himself.  I^Tow  it  is  obviously  im- 
possible for  a  finite  capacity  to  say  what  God  should  do  in 
the  punishment  of  si-n.  The  mind  cannot,  from  any  theory 
of  God,  decide  as  to  the  character  of  his  government  or  deal- 
ings toward  his  creatures.  True,  we  can  say  God  will  do 
nothing  unjust,  unworthy  of  himself,  or  opposed  to  the  great 
law  of  equity ;  but  this  is  the  very  difficulty  to  encounter,  to 
decide  what  in  all  cases  is  just,  equitable,  or  worthy  of  God. 
Such  a  question,  in  its  full  import,  can  be  decided  only  by 
God  himself. 

It  cannot  come  under  the  limited  capacity  of  man  to  say 
under  all  circumstances  what  God  should  do.  Why  so?  Be- 
cause, first,  man  does  not  know  what  all  circumstances  are, 
and  then  man  does  not  know  all  that  God  is.  Here  are  two 
mighty  objections  to  any  theory  of  the  human  mind  respect- 
ing what  should  be,  in  all  cases,  the  mode  of  the  divine  con- 
duct respecting  his  creatures.  Man  neither  knows  all  that 
God  is,  nor  all  the  circumstances  that  are  connected  with  his 
conduct.  Before,  then,  the  mind  presumes  to  dispute  any  re- 
vealed fact,  let  it  ask  itself  how  far  it  is  competent  to  sit  in 
judgment  upon  that  fact.  Is  it  not  obvious  that  if  the  in- 
strument of  thought  is  distorted  we  shall  have  an  erroneous 
impression  of  the  object  of  thought?  Is  it  not  certain  that 
if  the  mind  is  perverted  it  will  pervert  that  which  it  professes 
to  contemplate  ?  Should  not  man,  finite  in  all  his  faculties 
and  weak  in  all  his  powers,  remember  that  here  it  sees  in  part 
and  knows  in  part;  here  the  known  bears  no  comparison  to 
the  unknown ;  here  life  is  too  short  for  idle  dreams  or  useless 
speculations  ;  here  probation,  with  its  issues  for  eternity,  ad- 
monishes all  to  seek  first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  the 
friendship  of  the  Almighty,  so  that,  in  another  and  better 
world,  we  may  see  as  we  are  seen,  and  know  as  we  are 
known  ? 


CHAPTER   XXIV. 

ATHEISM. 

"The  living  God,  wHcli  made  heaven,  and  earth,  and  the  sea,  and  all  things 
that  are  therein." — Acts,  xiv.  15. 

"The  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart,  There  is  no  God."— Psalm  liii.  1. 

Consider  the  condition  of  the  atheist  upon  the  supposition 
that  there  is  no  God. 

His  condition  upon  the  supposition  that  there  is  a  God. 

If  atheism  is  tnie,  then  the  whole  system  of  natural  and  re- 
vealed theology  is  false, — both  are  founded  upon  the  ad- 
mission that  there  is  a  God.  If  there  is  no  God,  then  nature 
is  its  own  God.  Chance  is  the  deity  that  rules,  or  the  law 
unintelligent  of  an  irreversible  fatality,  or  some  unknown 
power  selfexistent,  pervading  all  substances,  blindly  de- 
pendent upon  nature,  or  itself  a  part  of  nature.  The  infinite 
diversities  of  mind  and  matter  have  then  no  other  origin  than 
chance,  or  some  cause  unknown  and  without  intelligence,  or 
they  had  an  existence  uncaused  and  from  eternity.  There  is, 
then,  no  independent  and  Almighty  Creator,  self-existent 
and  uncaused,  unlimited  in  his  agency  and  knowledge,  and 
infinite  in  goodness,  wisdom,  and  justice. 

What  does  atheism  gain  by  this  ?  The  atheist  is  no  better 
off,  in  any  respect,  than  those  who  believe  in  a  God.  By  re- 
moving the  highest  incentive  to  virtue  and  the  greatest  re- 
straint upon  sin,  the  atheist  gains  nothing  either  in  virtue  or 
happiness.  By  holding  to  no  higher  tribunal  for  his  conduct 
than  a  human  one,  he  makes  not  himself  more  useful  or 
happy,  he  adds  nothing  to  his  real  pleasures  or  virtues.  How 
is  the  atheist  better  off  in  this  world  than  the  believer  in  a 
God  of  infinite  purity,  justice,  and  benevolence?  Suppose 
him  to  find  out  the  fact  of  liis  inability  to  take  care  of  him- 

(247) 


248  ATHEISM. 

self,  or  others  to  take  care  of  him ;  suppose  him  conscious 
that  uo  human  aid  can  soothe  his  pain,  or  relieve  the  suf- 
ferings of  the  present  hour,  or  the  misery  that  threatens  him 
in  the  future, — is  he  better  ofi"  than  those  who  believe  in  a 
Being  so  wise  and  merciful  that  he  can  do  that  for  them 
that  no  human  agency  can  perform  ? 

But  the  atheist  is  no  better  than  the  believer  in  a  God  in  his 
relations  to  society  and  in  the  happiness  enjoyed  from  the  con- 
templation of  the  works  of  nature.  Atheism  does  not  help  its 
advocates  to  more  usefulness  or  more  peace  of  mind  in  the 
family  relation  :  it  is  a  poor  preparation  for  society.  Certainly 
civil  and  parental  government  must  lose  one  main  prop  to 
respect  and  efficiency  with  the  fear  of  God  removed,  and  the 
sanctions  of  a  higher  than  human  authority  done  away  with. 
The  atheist  walks  upon  the  earth,  and  yet  believes  in  no 
Creator  of  it ;  he  breathes  the  air,  and  confesses  no  Being 
who  mingles  in  such  nice  proportions  those  ethereal  elements 
that  separated  or  united  together  in  a  ditFerent  way  would 
destroy  all  animal  life ;  he  beholds  the  sun,  and  wonders  at 
the  mysterious  light  that,  coming  from  the  distant  orb,  gives 
beauty  and  growth  to  all  vegetation,  and  yet  that  sun  has  uo 
intelligent  author ;  he  admires  the  ocean  with  its  ever-mov- 
ing waters,  and  yet  believes  in  uo  infinite  mind  that  combines 
the  waters  together  and  makes  them  fit  for  countless  inhab- 
itants; he  looks  with  awe  upon  the  mountain,  raising  its 
majestic  head  above  the  clouds,  but  whether  there  is  a  maker 
of  that  mountain  does  not  convince  his  mind  ;  he  studies  the 
anatomy  of  the  human  frame,  but  the  skill  that  forms  the  eye, 
or  constructs  the  bones,  or  sends  the  blood  through  the  veins, 
has  its  cause  in  no  God. 

The  condition  of  the  atheist,  so  far  as  the  works  of  nature 
are  concerned,  is  far  inferior  in  happiness  to  tliB  believer  in  a 
God.  If  atheism  is  true, — yet  it  bears  upon  its  face  everything 
repulsive  and  gloomy, — if,  in  looking  upon  some  masterpiece 
of  human  mechanism,  it  is  a  pleasure  to  us  to  know  some 
intelligent  cause,  and  recognize  some  mind  that  adjusted  to- 
gether the  varied  parts,  is  there  no  pleasure  in  looking  upon 
the  universe  and  surveying  the  miracles  of  a  divine  workman- 


ATHEISM.  249 

ship  ?  When  the  atheist  contemplates  those  worlds  whose 
rapid  flight  through  space  no  finite  mind  can  comprehend, 
the  endless  diversities  of  hodies,  each  acting  in  accordance 
with  their  respective  laws,  he  sees  no  God  in  their  formation. 
Admitting  that  he  is  right,  was  there  ever  a  truth  more 
repulsive  or  destitute  of  pleasure  ? 

The  atheist  is  worse  off  than  the  heliever  in  a  God,  from 
the  fact  that  his  highest  rule  of  conduct  must  be  human  au- 
thority, or  what  appears  to  him  his  own  interests.  But 
human  authority  may  be  upon  the  side  of  vice,  and  the 
atheist's  self-interests  may  be  the  worst  selfishness.  If  im- 
punity to  sin  can  be  secured  with  no  earthly  punishment, 
why  be  intimidated  from  transgression,  since  no  punishment 
can  be  experienced  from  a  higher  tribunal?  If  vice  is  more 
profitable  than  virtue,  why  not  be  vicious,  since  there  is  no 
God  to  xHiiiish  ?  If  it  is  more  pleasant  to  act  as  we  please, 
however  pernicious  to  the  welfare  of  others,  why  not  do  so, 
if  human  justice  can  be  averted  and  divine  justice  not  expe- 
rienced? If  wealth,  hoDor,  or  pleasure  can  be  secured  by 
oppression  or  fraud,  why  not  use  these  means  to  secure  the 
heart's  desire,  if  there  is  no  God  to  judge  or  condemn  ? 

Consider,  also,  that  atheism,  true  or  false,  is  revolting  to 
the  conscience  and  those  sensibilities  of  our  nature  not  wholly 
dead  to  all  noble  activity.  If  man  has  a  lower  nature  that, 
with  passionate  inclinations,  leads  him  to  sin,  he  yet  has  con- 
science and  reason,  and  the  faculty  of  judgment,  and  natural 
perceptions  of  what  is  true  and  honorable  and  fitting  to 
moral  excellence.  The  idea  of  no  God  is  opposed  to  the 
voice  of  conscience,  that  speaks  of  an  authority  higher  for  hu- 
man conduct  than  the  laws  alone  of  man.  The  atheist,  by 
suppressing  the  instinctive  convictions  of  conscience  and 
reason,  is  in  no  way  to  advance  his  internal  peace  or  pure 
gratification.  The  atheist,  by  waging  war  with  the  better 
part  of  his  nature,  only  helps  on  the  worse, — he  not  only 
applies  a  burning  torch  to  the  magazine  of  his  evil  passions, 
but  removes  away  the  natural  reservoir  of  waters  that  God, 
in  mercy,  has  given  to  quench  the  flames  of  base  desires. 
Such  is  our  nature,  and  such  is  the  existing  relation  of  things, 


250  ATHEISM. 

that  virtue  and  happiness  are  both  sacrificed  by  rebelling 
against  the  conscience  and  permitting  the  lower  part  of  our 
nature  to  lord  it  over  the  higher.  But  our  noblest  impulses 
are  all  favorable  to  the  admission  of  a  God,  and  our  account- 
ability to  a  source  immeasurably  superior  to  any  human  au- 
thority. Atheism,  so  far  as  it  dares,  throws  the  whole 
weight  of  its  influence  to  help  on  the  inferior  part  of  our  na- 
ture. By  waging  war  with  our  best  impulses,  and  not  heed- 
ing the  voice  of  conscience  when  it  speaks  of  accountability 
to  a  divine  being,  it  weakens  beyond  description  the  moral 
power  to  be  virtuous.  An  atheistical  heart  is  the  hot-bed  of 
all  vice.  Human  law  can  only  suppress  the  outward  devel- 
opments of  those  sins  more  immediately  dangerous  to  society. 
What,  then,  is  the  mischief  engendered  in  the  community 
when  no  fear  of  God  exists  to  stop  the  deep  under-currents 
of  sin  ? 

But  consider  atheism  in  its  relation  to  the  future.  Either  all 
the  enjoyments  of  the  atheist  are  with  the  body,  to  be  buried 
in  the  grave,  or,  if  there  is  a  future  life  in  reserve  for  him,  he 
has  no  reason  to  believe  it  will  be  any  better  or  so  good  as 
the  present  life.  He  takes,  as  a  celebrated  infidel  once  ex- 
pressed, a  leap  in  the  dark;  and  how  does  he  know  but  that  he 
may  be  as  likely  to  jump  into  misery  as  into  nothingness? 
"What  argument  can  he  ofi:er  to  show  that,  if  eternal  oblivion 
is  not  his  portion  after  death,  it  may  not  be  an  existence 
combining  worse  elements  of  wretchedness  than  the  present  ? 
If  the  atheist  instinctively  shrinks  from  the  death  of  the 
brute,  and,  like  Milton's  fallen  angels,  would  desire  an  exist- 
ence even  of  pain  to  eternal  nothingness,  what  kind  of  exist- 
ence in  the  future  has  he  to  ofi'er  ?  With  the  denial  of  the 
first  truth  of  natural  and  revealed  theology,  what  are  the 
hopes  of  the  atheist  after  death  ?  Shutting  out  from  his 
mind  Christ,  the  great  medium  of  redemption,  and  absolving 
himself  from  the  sacred  restraints  of  Christianit}',  the  atheist 
adds  to  the  hopelessness  of  his  state  by  extinguishing  even 
the  torch  of  nature.  Thus,  atheism,  if  true,  is  so  gloomy  and 
repulsive  that  its  admission  involves  in  a  worse  than  Egyp- 
tian darkness  the  world.     If  atheism  derides  the  restraints  of 


ATHEIS3L  2ol 

religion,  it  has  none  of  its  elevating  tendencies  or  hopes. 
Atheism  avoids  the  future,  for  the  future  is  cheerless  and  un- 
certain. Beyond  this  world  all  is  doubt.  The  present  life 
is,  then,  the  only  sphere  of  action  that  the  atheist  loves  to 
contemplate.  Man's  vision  is  contracted  to  the  few  short 
years  of  his  mortal  existence.  But  does  the  atheist  imagine 
that,  by  shutting  out  from  the  mind  every  beam  of  immor- 
tality, he  makes  happier  or  better  this  world  ?  Does  he  dream 
that,  when  he  has  enthroned  in  the  heart  the  poor  idols  of 
time,  he  has  retrieved  the  losses  of  eternity  ?  If  the  atheist 
has  made  out  religion  a  fiction,  and  a  personal  God  a  delu- 
sion, has  he  conferred  any  real  favor  upon  man  ?  Is  it  not 
true,  the  more  contracted  our  hopes  the  less  noble  onr  con- 
duct ?  Does  the  atheist  imagine  the  good  have  any  thanks 
for  a  system  that  makes  the  present  hour  alone  valuable  and 
extinguishes  the  bright  hopes  of  the  future  ? 

But  consider  the  condition  of  the  atheist  upon  the  sup- 
position that  there  is  a  God.  If  atheism  is  untrue,  then  what 
follows  ?  The  existence  of  God  reveals  the  great  fact  of  his 
government,  natural  and  moral.  To  learn  what  the  govern- 
ment of  God  is,  we  have  two  books  to  consult, — nature  and 
revelation.  The  first  lesson  we  learn,  as  moral  beings,  is 
that  the  present  life  is  one  of  trial  under  the  government  of 
God.  Here  upon  this  earth  are  we  placed,  with  duties  to  per- 
form and  sins  to  resist.  Here  are  we  tempted,  and  yet  not 
compelled  into  sin  ;  allured  to  virtue,  but  not  forced  into  it. 
There  are  certain  actions  that  human  and  divine  law  combine 
to  deter  us  from  committing,  while  there  are  other  deeds  the 
performance  of  which  secures  the  approval  of  the  divine  law 
and  our  conscience.  Against  the  more  atrocious  develop- 
ments of  sin  the  laws  of  God  and  man  are  arrayed,  while 
with  every  impure  desire  or  wrong  purpose  there  is  made 
known  the  opposition  of  the  will  of  God.  Those  sins  that 
cannot  be  reached  by  human  government  are  all  condemned 
by  divine  law.  Thus,  even  the  atheist  finds  in  his  own  ex- 
perience that  the  sanctions  of  human  and  divine  law  are 
upon  him. 

In  this  world  for  some  sins  the  divine  government  pecu- 


252  ATHEISM. 

liarly  manifests  its  indignation.  In  the  very  constitution  of 
man  God  writes  the  impress  of  his  authority.  Let  a  person 
give  himself  up  to  strong  drink,  or  the  control  of  impure 
passion,  and  even  upon  the  body  are  inscribed  the  characters 
of  divine  indignation.  Let  a  person  habitually  foster  in  him- 
self anger,  or  malice,  or  envy,  or  fraud,  and  it  will  not  be 
long  before  even  the  body  will  reveal  the  injury  done  to  the 
soul.  Here,  then,  we  see  sensuality  and  intemperance  writing 
in  lineaments  of  wrath  their  impress  upon  the  form  of  man. 
Here  we  see  the  baser  passions  of  our  nature  inscribing  their 
fatal  mark  upon  the  soul  and  body  of  man. 

Why,  then,  is  the  whole  course  of  nature  so  hostile  to  sin 
and  so  friendly  to  virtue  ?  Why  does  our  constitution  thus 
reveal  the  misery  of  sin  ?  With  the  evidence  of  God,  is 
there  not  made  known  his  moral  government?  Consider 
that  the  government  of  God  is  uniformly  upon  the  side  of 
virtue:  it  is  based  upon  those  principles  that,  acted  out, 
secure  the  highest  welfare  of  every  person.  Thus,  the  laws 
of  God  disapprove  of  all  sin  and  approve  of  all  virtue, — they 
demand  the  performance  of  those  duties  that  involve  in  them 
the  noblest  blessings.  If  justice  is  an  essential  feature  of 
God's  government,  so  is  benevolence.  Who  but  God  insti- 
tuted that  system  of  things  by  which  one  kind  of  action  pro- 
motes our  welfare  while  another  results  in  our  wretchedness? 
Here,  then,  we  see  the  truth  revealed  of  a  probationary  state, 
and  that  the  divine  purposes  are  tending  to  some  higher  con- 
summation, where  there  is  to  be  the  revelation  more  perfectly 
of  God's  dealings  with  mankind. 

Another  feature  of  God's  government  is,  that  it  holds  all 
mankind  accountable  for  their  conduct.  Law  implies  subjects. 
All  being  under  the  government  of  God  are  bound  to  obey 
his  will. 

Revelation  makes  known  the  great  fact  that  the  govern- 
ment of  God  over  man  includes  not  only  the  present  life,  but 
also  the  future, — that  this  Avorld  is  only  a  rude  stage  of  exist- 
ence, where  are  cultivated  those  plants  that  must  have  another 
sphere  of  being  to  reach  their  maturity  of  sin  or  virtue.  The 
existence  of  God,  with  the  clear  intimations  of  his  will  in  na- 


ATHEISM.  253 

tare  and  revelation,  show  ns  a  boundless  future  beyond  the 
grave,  an  illimitable  expanse  of  time,  where  thought,  feel- 
ing, and  perception  continue, — where  the  soul  will  look  back 
upon  the  associations  and  scenes  of  time,  even  as  the  mariner 
upon  the  ocean  observes  upon  the  far-distant  sea  the  dim 
outlines  of  the  land  no  longer  to  be  visited  as  his  home  or 
the  nursery  of  his  infant  years.  Thus,  God's  government 
in  relation  to  man  has  in  it  progressive  stages  of  develop- 
ment, so  that  what  now  is  dark  will  in  the  future  become 
clear,  and  what  now  is  unknown  will  by  creatures  be  under- 
stood, so  that  the  apparent  irregularities  with  the  evils  sin 
has  introduced  into  the  world  will  hereafter  find  an  explana- 
tion such  as  shall  remove  all  doubt  of  the  goodness  of 
God. 

Another  indication  of  the  moral  government  of  God  is, 
that  there  actually  does  exist  in  harmony  with  that  govern- 
ment a  system  of  redemption  by  Christ.  We  live  under  the 
strange  anomaly  of  grace  and  law,  of  a  system  comprehend- 
ing the  most  perfect  justice  and  at  the  same  time  the  most 
unlimited  mercy, — a  system  where  divine  law  for  a  short 
time  stands  in  abeyance,  while  infinite  love,  through  the 
mediation  of  Christ,  works  its  miracles  of  salvation  for  re- 
deemed sinners.  To  deny  the  ftict  of  God's  existence,  and  con- 
sequently his  government,  under  a  system  of  law,  would  be  far 
more  excusable  than  to  deny  them  under  a  system  of  grace. 
If  atheism  under  the  former  would  reveal  neither  reason  nor 
wisdom,  what  shall  be  said  of  atheism  under  the  latter?  The 
real  sin  lies  not  so  much  in  the  mind  that  pretends  to  believe 
there  is  no  good  evidence  of  God's  existence,  as  in  the  heart 
that  wishes  it  to  be  so.  It  is  an  indication  not  so  much  of 
want  of  intellect  as  want  of  all  good  sensibility  to  the  grand- 
est of  truths  and  the  best  of  beings.  How  slender  is  the 
argument  necessary  to  induce  a  man  to  embark  his  fortune 
in  an  enterprise  where  nothing  can  be  lost  by  the  venture,  but 
everything  may  be  gained  !  But  the  atheist  reverses  this  rule 
of  wisdom :  he  ventures  his  all  where  nothing  is  gained  if 
there  is  no  God,  and  everything  is  lost  if  there  is.  The  atheist 
increases  his  condemnation  by  presuming  upon  such  a  course 


254  ATHEISM. 

under  an  economy  of  grace.  "While  atheistical  in  heart,  grace 
can  be  no  grace  to  him, — the  golden  h^nrs  of  probation  in  re- 
spect to  salvation  are  nothing  to  him, — angels  of  love  inviting 
to  a  fairer  world  can  be  no  angels  to  him, — ministers  of  affec- 
tion standing  by  his  sleeping  couch,  or  present  in  the  sweet 
retirement  of  home,  can  avail  nothing  for  him  ;  with  the 
denial  of  God  he  cuts  himself  aloof  from  all  those  influences 
that  would  otherwise  lead  him  to  heaven.  When  he  looks 
upon  nature,  with  her  endless  diversities  of  form,  he  looks 
upon  a  blank,  a  causeless  something  with  no  intelligent  au- 
thor; when  he  surveys  the  heavens,  he  recognizes  only  an 
unmeaning  law,  or  a  blind  chance ;  all  creation  is  open  for 
inspection,  but  its  great  Author  is  denied.  The  Being  who 
paints  the  flower  of  the  fleld  or  the  rainbow  that  arches  the 
sky,  or  gives  music  to  the  bird  that  warbles,  or  strength  and 
intelligence  to  man,  is  forgotten. 

To  see  more  clearly  the  real  nature  of  atheism,  let  us  con- 
trast it  in  its  influence  with  Christianity.  It  is  not  our  object 
to  speak  of  the  truth  of  Christianity,  or  discuss  the  evidences 
of  its  divine  origin.  We  only  purpose  to  portray  it  in  its 
influence  upon  mankind.  Atheism  comes  professedly  to  de- 
liver the  mind  from  the  shackles  of  Christianity.  To  believe 
in  the  God  of  revelation  would  be  to  deny  itself.  To  admit 
a  God  would  be  to  admit  the  duties  we  owe  to  him,  and  all 
the  sanctions  of  his  moral  government ;  but  if  there  is  no 
God,  then  Christianity  is  a  fable,  and  the  sanctions  of  religion 
are  unfounded.  In  what  respect,  then,  is  atheism  better  than 
Christianity  ?  Here  are  the  ills  of  life,  with  their  inevitable 
attendants.  Here  come  death  and  sickness,  and  poverty 
and  hunger  and  want,  all  the  wretchedness  of  CTime  and  the 
pains  of  dissipation  and  folly:  these  things  do  exist  in  the 
world.  Two  difterent  schemes  are  presented  to  remedy  the 
evils  of  the  present  life — atheism  and  Christianity;  each  as 
diverse  as  light  and  darkness.  In  what  respect  does  atheism 
remedy  the  ills  of  life,  or  give  the  assurance  of  a  better  state 
beyond  the  grave  ?  No  rule  of  judgment  more  correct  than 
that  based  upon  the  influence  exerted.  Atheism  says  there 
is  no  God,  consequently  there  is  no  Saviour  for  sinners,  no 


ATHEISM.  255 

immortality  of  blessedness  as  made  known  is  revelation  for 
the  believing  in  Christ ;  atheism  at  the  best  can  offer  nothing 
beyond  the  grave  but  a  condition  like  that  of  the  present  life, 
and  that  even  it  cannot  make  certain  by  a  single  argument. 
It  must  of  necessity,  therefore,  limit  its  promises  and  hopes 
to  the  present  world.  What  does  it  offer?  By  removing  all 
the  restraints  of  the  future  it  shuts  up  the  mind  only  to  the 
enjoyments  of  the  present  hour.  What  does  it  offer  for  that 
hour  ?     What  the  paradise  it  makes  out  of  this  life  ? 

Atheism  has  indeed  its  conventional  rules,  but  all  those 
rules  it  discards  when  opportunity  gives  impunity  and  license 
gratification.  It  forms  for  itself  a  code  of  laws,  and  the  chief 
one  upon  the  list  is,  your  own  pleasure  is  your  highest  law, 
and  your  only  restraint  should  be  the  impossibility  of  gratifi- 
cation. Thus  it  embodies  in  itself,  as  its  essential  element, 
that  which  discards  all  moral  obligation,  or  any  rule  of  duty 
that  depends  upon  the  will  of  God  and  the  best  welfare  of 
mankind.  Examine,  then,  atheism  in  its  influence  upon  the 
individual  and  upon  society.  One  of  the  first  things  we 
learn  in  coming  into  the  world  is,  that  our  own  pleasure,  to 
be  innocent,  must  not  be  at  the  expense  of  the  pleasure  of 
others,  and  our  own  gratification,  to  be  right,  must  never  in- 
fringe upon  the  best  interests  of  society.  Christianity  makes 
around  each  individual  a  circle,  and  says,  beyond  that  circle 
you  must  not  go,  or  you  trespass  upon  the  rights  of  your 
neighbor.  To  e-o  without  your  circle  is  to  exclude  vourself 
from  all  the  real  pleasures  of  your  circle,  as  well  as  do  injury 
to  others.  Thus  the  chief  element  of  Christianity  is  that  of 
good  restraint,  because  by  it  the  individual  and  the  commu- 
nity move  in  harmony,  and  by  respecting  the  rights  of  each 
the  interests  of  the  whole  are  mutually  promoted.  What 
does  atheism  do  ?  It  breaks  down  that  wall  of  self-protection 
that  binds  all  society  together  with  the  cord  of  friendship 
and  of  love.  By  giving  a  license  to  the  passions  and  appe- 
tites of  our  nature  that  Christianity  condemns,  by  absolving 
the  individual  from  holy  restraints  that  the  gospel  approves 
of,  it  turns  the  individual  loose  upon  the  community,  to  be  to 
society,  wherever  his  own  selfish  interests  may  lead,  its  greatest 


256  ATHEISM. 

enemy.  How  then  does  atheism  benefit  the  world?  As  far 
as  it  can  go  or  it  dares  to  go,  it  mocks  at  the  wholesome 
restraints  of  religion,  and  makes  no  higher  law  to  the  indi- 
vidual than  his  private  inclination.  What  of  the  sweets  of 
life  does  it  offer  to  society  more  than  the  religion  of  Christ  ? 
It  is  the  glory  of  atheism  to  absolve  the  individual  and  society 
from  those  restraints  that  religion  most  earnestly  seeks  to  im- 
pose. Its  creed  consists  in  no  religion.  Christ  and  God  are 
names  that  atheism  would  obliterate  from  the  memory  of  all, 
or  only  rehearse  them  to  show  its  triumph  over  religion. 
After  throwing  the  Bible  into  the  fire,  and  stifling  with  its 
profane  scofits  every  aspiration  of  holiness, — after  it  makes 
itself  an  undisputed  master  of  the  cottage  and  the  palace,  and 
is  the  public  guest  of  the  nation  and  the  idol  of  its  warmest 
love,  what  are  the  rewards  it  bestows,  what  the  substitute  it 
ofifers  for  the  hopes  of  the  gospel  ? 

When  atheism  had  one  triumph  in  France,  what  did  it  do? 
It  secured  the  national  divorcement  of  the  people  from  the 
restraints  of  the  Bible.  It  placed  upon  the  throne  the  God- 
dess of  Reason,  and  made  all  Paris  ring  with  its  hymn  of  tri- 
umph over  the  death  of  Christianity.  But  anarchy  and  ruin 
followed  in  the  rear  of  its  track, — the  guillotine  drank  up 
the  best  blood  of  the  nation, — personal  property  and  life 
every  day  were  endangered,  and  the  sword  of  atheism,  in  a  few 
short  years,  devoured  three  millions  of  the  people.  Equality, 
fraternity,  and  liberty  were  the  only  trinity  adored ;  but  no 
heathen  temple  could  reveal  three  gods  more  vile  or  more 
cruel.  The  equality  of  atheism  aimed  to  obliterate  the  just 
distinctions  of  society  that  alone  preserved  it  from  stagna- 
tion,— its  fraternity  attempted  to  bind,  by  the  coercion  of 
physical  force,  those  diverse  orders  of  mankind  in  unison 
whose  hearts  alone  could  be  reached  by  moral  renovation, — 
its  liberty  was  but  another  name  for  passion  uncontrolled  by 
those  good  influences  that  give  to  freedom  its  only  value. 
Thus  did  atheism  show  itself  when  it  had  a  fair  opportunity; 
and  who  would  wish  to  see  repeated  like  scenes  of  its  vic- 
tory ? 

But  atheism,  in  doing  away  with  the  laws  of  God,  tends  di- 


A  THEISM.  257 

rectly  to  do  away  with  parental  and  civil  law;  its  code  of  mo- 
rality is  so  corrupt  that  it  does  not  oifer  to  society  a  single 
support.  By  removing  the  highest  restraint  upon  vice  it 
suiters  it  to  roam  at  large,  until  it  becomes  so  formidable  that 
it  even  welcomes  as  a  self-protection  the  greatest  absurdities 
of  superstition.  Atheism,  having  nothing  to  recommend  it, 
seeks  to  pass  itself  off  under  the  guise  of  something  that  is 
better,  and  is  never  more  ill  at  ease  than  when  it  finds  itself 
stripped  of  the  garment  of  false  religion,  that  it  assumes  to 
enable  it  more  effectually  to  make  its  thrusts  at  that  re- 
ligion which  is  true.  Atheism  destroys  those  generous 
emotions  that  lead  to  self-sacrifice  for  the  general  good. 
It  freezes  up  the  purest  sensibilities  and  the  noblest  sym- 
pathies of  our  nature.  By  introducing  as  the  only  standard 
of  conduct  its  mercenary  code  of  selfishness,  it  effectually 
suppresses  all  the  promptings  of  virtue  and  of  disinterested 
affection.  Having  converted  the  belief  of  God  into  a  fable, 
and  the  atoning  love  of  Christ  into  a  device  of  supersti- 
tion, it  destroys,  with  the  highest  check  upon  vice,  the 
loftiest  hopes  of  man.  Possessing  in  itself  no  intrinsic  merit, 
giving  no  good  support  to  society  or  security  to  domestic 
purity,  it  wanders  over  the  earth  with  the  mark  of  Cain  upon 
its  forehead,  and  all  the  wretchedness  of  the  first  murderer  in 
its  heart. 

No  thanks  to  atheism  for  those  checks  that  God,  in  mercy, 
has  placed  upon  its  progress, — no  thanks  to  it  for  that  law 
of  self-preservation  that  makes  even  the  most  corrupt  to 
shudder  with  the  good  at  the  contemplation  of  its  prospec- 
tive triumphs.  Well  n;ay  mothers  weep,  and  children,  aban- 
doned, cry,  and  the  aged  and  oppressed  groan  in  despair, 
when  atheism  walks  with  bold  and  merciless  visage  in  their 
midst !  Well  may  nature  clothe  herself  in  a  robe  of  dark- 
ness, and  throw  over  all  her  scenes  of  loveliness  and  beauty 
a  drapery  of  mourning,  when  atheism  sits  upon  the  world's 
throne,  and  sings  his  bloody  hymn  of  victory  over  the  death 
and  burial  of  Christianity  ! 

17 


REVEALED  THEOLOGY. 


(259) 


REVEALED   THEOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  I. 

NECESSITY   OF   A   REVELATION   FROM   GOD. 

The  foundation  of  all  our  reasoning  upon  the  evidences  of 
Christianity  rests  upon  the  admission  of  three  truths,  estab- 
lished by  the  light  of  nature, — God,  Conscience,  and  Man  a 
sinner,  responsible  and  free. 

We  enter  now  upon  the  discussion  of  the  great  questions : 

Is  the  Bible  a  revelation,  in  any  sense,  of  the  mind  and  will 
of  Cod  ? 

Were  the  writers  of  the  Bible  inspired  by  God,  and  how 
inspired  ? 

Have  we,  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  a  clear  exhibi- 
tion of  the  mind,  character,  purposes,  and  feelings  of  God 
toward  man  ? 

Is  not  the  Bible,  in  the  highest  sense,  a  supreme  authority 
for  human  conduct  ? 

What  is  the  proof  of  the  Divine  Mission  of  Christ,  and  what 
its  necessity? 

If,  in  reply  to  these  questions,  it  is  shown  that  the  Bible  is 
from  God,  then  it  must  be  infinitely  superior  to  any  human 
production,  as  making  known  God's  will,  and  it  must  have 
the  sanctions  of  its  great  Author,  demanding  our  faith  and 
obedience.  But  if  the  Bible  has  only  a  human  origin,  then 
it  must  have  only  a  human  authority,  and  consequently  our 
obligation  to  believe  and  obey  it  must  be  measured  by  a 
human  standard.  As  the  words  of  God  are  infinitely  superior 
in  dignity  to  the  words  of  man,  so  also,  if  the  Bible  contains 
only  the  words  of  man,  is  not  inspired,  then  must  it  be  as  in- 

(261) 


262  NECESSITY  OF  A 

ferior  in  worth  to  an  inspired  production  as  man  himself  is 
inferior  to  God. 

A  revelation  from  God  is  necessary  for  us,  not  only  because 
we  are  sinners,  and  need  every  favorable  influence  to  lead  us 
in  the  right  way,  but  especially  because  the  light  of  nature 
has  failed  to  guide  men  aright.  ISow,  God  has  a  right  to 
speak  to  us  in  the  way  he  thinks  best.  The  question  for 
us  to  consider  is  simply  one  of  fact:  Has  God  spoken  to  us? 
We  cannot  prescribe  to  God  the  mode  of  the  divine  com- 
munications. It  is  not  for  us  to  say  how  God  shall  speak  to  us, 
or  when  he  shall  thus  do.  God  may  not  choose  to  reveal  to 
us  all  the  reasons  of  his  conduct.  The  infidel  objects  to  the 
Christian  scheme  because  it  is  a  revelation  given  to  us,  not 
at  once,  but  at  different  periods  of  the  world ;  but,  unless 
this  was  most  pleasing  to  God,  he  would  not  have  resorted  to 
it.  He  objects  that  an  obscure  nation  of  Jews  was  the  chosen 
depository  of  the  divine  messages  to  man,  but  God  has  a 
right  to  select  whom  he  pleases  for  such  a  work.  He  objects 
to  the  difficulties  of  revelation,  but  he  might  as  well  object 
to  the  difficulties  of  nature.  He  objects  to  the  mysteries  of 
the  gospel,  but  there  are  other  mysteries  in  the  world  besides 
those  of  revelation.  He  objects  to  many  things  incompre- 
hensible in  the  Bible,  but  his  objection  is  equally  valid 
against  the  incomprehensible  of  his  own  body.  We  might 
go  on  to  speak  of  many  other  objections,  but  it  is  not  neces- 
sary here.  Our  object  is  only  to  establish  the  proposition 
that  whoever  admits  the  existence  of  God  must  also  admit 
his  right  to  give  a  revelation  of  his  will  in  the  way  and  time 
most  pleasing  to  him.  The  question  for  us  to  settle  is 
simply  a  question  of  fact. 

The  Scriptures  come  to  us  as  the  word  of  God ;  they  pro- 
fess to  be  divinely  inspired  and  a  revelation  of  his  will.  Are 
they  what  they  profess?  In  deciding  upon  this  question, 
there  is  one  uniform  law  of  belief  that  is  never  to  be  forgot- 
ten. This  law  is,  that  we  are  authorized  to  believe  in  any- 
thing when  the  reasons  for  belief  are  greater  than  the 
reasons  for  unbelief.  Thus,  we  credit  testimony  just  in  pro- 
portion to  the  evidence  existing.     By  a  law  of  our  minds  we 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  263 

are  authorized  to  believe  whenever  the  evidence  for  a  thins; 
is  greater  than  the  evidence  against  it.  The  question  is  not 
so  much  the  degree  of  evidence  that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of 
God,  as  is  there  any  evidence  at  all  that  it  is  such  ?  Before 
we  are  authorized  to  reject  it  as  a  divine  revelation,  we 
must  show  that  there  is  greater  evidence  that  it  is  not  such, 
than  that  it  does  come  from  God.  It  is  not  for  us  to  pre- 
scribe to  God  hoW'  much  evidence  he  must  give  us  to  show 
the  Bible  divine.  Our  only  course  is  to  take  the  revelation, 
as  it  comes  to  us,  and  examine  its  credentials.  It  may  have 
great  or  small  credentials,  few  or  many,  but  if  the  word  of 
God  has  any  credentials,  we  are  to  receive  it,  so  long  as  no 
evidence  exists  to  the  contrary.  Here  is  the  stumbling-block 
with  many  in  receiving  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God.  They 
prescribe  to  God  just  the  evidence  he  must  give,  and  if  their 
standard  is  not  reached  they  reject  the  Bible;  they  say  we 
must  have  evidence  as  demonstrative  as  mathematical  evi- 
dence; they  say  such  objections  in  respect  to  style  or  his- 
toric narrations  of  Jewish  customs,  battles,  manners,  or  lan- 
guage, must  be  fully  cleared  up  to  their  satisfaction  before 
the}'  receive  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God.  All  such  reasoning 
is  alike  irreverent  and  out  of  place.  "We  have  no  more  right  to 
prescribe  to  God  the  exact  mode  or  degree  of  revelation  than 
we  have  the  matter  of  it.  This  is  the  business  alone  of  the  au- 
thor of  revelation  and  does  not  concern  those  who  receive  it. 
Whether  God's  revelation  comes  to  us  with  a  high  or  low 
degree  of  evidence,  whether  its  mode  suits  our  feelings  or  not, 
are  questions  that  are  not  to  influence  us  to  the  rejection  of 
the  word  of  God.  Our  simple  business  is,  to  see  if  we  can 
offset  with  our  evidences,  the  evidences  of  Christianity.  If 
the  evidences  of  Christianity  excel  ever  so  little  the  evidences 
against  it,  it  is  reasonable  in  us  to  believe  in  the  Bible. 
Thus,  taking  a  position  the  most  favorable  for  the  unbeliever, 
it  can  be  shown  that  thousands  receive  the  Bible,  and  yet 
they  may  give  vastly  less  proof  of  it  than  what  really  exists. 
Here  consists  the  great  error  of  infidelity.  It  imagines  that, 
by  raising  difiiculties  in  the  Bible  and  apparent  inconsisten- 
cies, the  Bible  can  be  disproved.     But  the  real  question  is, 


264  NECESSITY  OF  A 

Does  any  evidence  exist  that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God  ? 
If  80,  that  evidence  must  be  disproved  before  it  can  be  denied 
that  the  Bible  comes  from  God.  If  the  Bible  had  but  a 
thousandth  part  of  its  present  evidence,  yet  that  evidence  ex- 
isting would  sanction  belief.  If  we  can  clear  up  the  difficul- 
ties of  the  infidel,  it  is  well ;  but  if  we  cannot,  his  infidelity 
does  not  disprove  the  Bible.  Are  there  not,  however,  multi- 
tudes, because  of  some  specious  objection,  or  some  verbal 
inaccuracy,  who  throw  away  the  Bible  ?  They  wait  not  for 
infidelity  to  prove  miracles  and  prophecy  false  and  the  thou- 
sand internal  evidences  of  the  Bible, — they  willingly  suffer 
the  whole  to  be  condemned  because  of  those  few  difficulties 
which  they  cannot  master.  Suppose,  for  argument,  the  ob- 
jector to  prove  out  one  chapter  or  book  uninspired,  he  has 
yet,  step  by  step,  to  prove  out  every  chapter  and  book  of 
revelation  uninspired  ;  suppose  him  to  prove  that  the  evi- 
dence of  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God  is  small,  he  has  yet  to 
prove,  before  with  reason  it  can  be  rejected,  that  there  is  no 
evidence  whatever,  great  or  small,  that  the  Bible  is  the  word 
of  God.  All  this  he  must  do  before  he  can  be  entitled  to  con- 
fidence. Should  God  choose  to  give  us  little  evidence  of 
a  divine  revelation,  then  we  ought  to  receive  that  evidence 
and  make  the  most  of  it.  Evidence  is  evidence,  be  it  small 
or  great,  and  with  no  higher  evidence  to  offset  it  the  part  of 
reason  and  good  judgment  is  to  receive  it. 

Having  established  the  proposition  that  we  are  bound  to 
believe  in  all  evidence  whatever,  in  proportion  to  its  value 
and  truth,  and  that  no  evidence,  if  good,  is  to  be  rejected, 
even  if  small,  we  will  consider  the  great  question  of  the  ne- 
cessity of  a  revelation  from  God.  If  the  Bible  is  not  neces- 
sary for  us, — if  it  is  useless  as  it  concerns  our  best  interests, 
there  is  a  high  presumption  against  its  being  the  word  of 
God.  If  we  do  not  need  a  revelation  from  God  it  is  reasona- 
able  to  believe  that  God,  who  does  nothing  uselessly,  will  not 
give  us  a  revelation.  On  the  other  hand,  if  we  do  need  a 
revelation  from  God  to  make  us  better  and  happier, — if  it 
would  advance  our  best  interests  for  this  life  and  the  life  to 
come  to  have  a  divine  communication  from  God,  then  it  is 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  266 

probable  that  God  will  give  us  ^  revelation  to  guide,  en- 
lighten, and  save.  To  determine  the  probability  of  a  revela- 
tion from  God,  from  its  necessity,  we  are  to  consider  three 
subjects :  God,  conscience,  and  the  history  of  the  human  race. 
First,  let  us  consider  God.  His  existence  is  admitted  :  then, 
in  power,  he  must  be  infinite;  consequently  he  can  give  a  re- 
velation with  its  credentials,  when  and  as  he  pleases.  But 
God  is  also  admitted  to  be  just:  then,  if  there  is  any  way  by 
which  that  justice  can  be  sustained  and  sinners  saved,  it 
is  highly  probable  he  will  make  it  known.  But  God  is 
admitted  to  be  good :  then,  if  benevolent,  it  is  probable 
he  will  reveal  that  which  may  bless  mankind.  Here,  then, 
is  God,  powerful,  just,  and  good.  Is  this  truth  admitted? 
Where,  then,  the  improbability  that  he  would  give,  if  needed, 
a  revelation  ? 

Thus,  so  far  as  God  is  concerned,  we  cannot  say  a  revelation 
from  him  is  impossible  or  improbable.  Look  to  the  conscience 
and  man's  history'  to  see  if  it  is  not  necessary.  Consider  the 
conscience,  can  it  be  hardened,  or  blinded,  or  made  treach- 
erous, or  unfaithful  ?  Can  the  moral  nature  be  so  perverted 
as  to  call  evil  good,  and  good  evil  ?  To  answer  this  question 
we  point  to  facts.  The  world  is  full  of  blind,  hard,  and  un- 
faithful consciences.  What  one  thinks  is  dut}^  another  thinks 
is  a  crime.  The  Hindoo  believes  in  self-immolation ;  the 
Chinese  think  infiinticide  meritorious.  The  heathen  moralist 
glories  in  suicide,  and  the  worst  excesses  of  impure  passion 
by  the  pagan  are  justified  as  most  honorable  to  the  Deity.  A 
wrong  conscience  is  the  parent  of  the  worst  deeds  of  fanati- 
cism, and  the  constant  annoj-ance  of  all  civil  legislation.  A 
perverted  conscience  is  the  source  of  all  religious  delusion, 
even  as  it  is  of  cruel  bigotry.  Before  the  assassin  plunges 
the  dagger  into  the  heart  of  his  victim  he  will  offer  a  prayer 
to  the  Virgin  Mary,  if  not  unto  God,  and  the  darkest  atroci- 
ties of  superstition  must  first  be  made  justifiable  by  the 
verdict  of  an  unfaithful  conscience.  Thus  do  we  find  the 
strangest  inconsistencies  approved  of  by  the  conscience,  and 
the  very  thing  one  person  believes  true  or  virtuous,  another 
condemns  as  false  and  vicious.     If  thus  the  conscience,  which 


266  NECESSITY  OF  A 

God  lias  given  to  us,  is  so^perverted,  does  it  not  need  a  divine 
revelation  to  guide  it  ?  Is  there  not  necessary,  in  order  to  cor- 
rect this  ever-changing  needle,  some  infallible  standard  of 
right  conduct?  If  conscience  is  all  we  want  to  guide  us 
right,  why  does  it  not  thus  do  ?  Is  it  possible,  or  probable, 
admitting  the  goodness  of  God  and  his  desire  to  save  sinners, 
that  he  would  leave  the  human  family  alone  to  so  treacher- 
ous a  pilot?  1^0  matter  if  we  exclusively  are  to  blame  for 
the  abuse  of  conscience,  the  fact,  wide  as  the  world,  exists  of 
its  perverted  movements.  What  more  probable  than  that  at 
some  time  a  better  guide  might  be  given  ? 

But  there  are  other  reasons  why  a  revelation  from  God  is 
most  needful.  Consider  human  experience  in  past  history. 
If  the  deists  think  they  can  get  along  very  well  without  a 
revelation  from  God,  the  greatest  geniuses  and  most  gifted 
minds  of  antiquity  did  not  think  so.  They  deplored  the 
wretched  state  of  things,  and  most  fervently  prayed  for  a 
purer  light,  and  better  guide.  They  did  not  consider  nature's 
light  enough,  rather  they  felt  like  blind  men  groping  their 
way  over  mountains  of  danger.  Plato  tells  us,  "We  know 
not  of  ourselves  what  worship  to  pay  to  God,  or  what  peti- 
tions to  offer.  We  must  expect  a  lawgiver  from  heaven  to 
instruct  us;  and  oh,  how  I  long  to  see  that  man,  and  who  he 
is !  he  must  be  of  a  nature  superior  to  man's  {i.e.  divine), 
because  of  the  unwillingness  of  men  to  be  guided  except  by 
superiors.     He  must  be  a  mediator." 

Socrates,  as  revealing  the  prevailing  darkness  in  respect  to 
a  future  state,  said  a  short  time  before  his  death,  "I  hope 
I  go  to  good  men,  but  this  I  do  not  affirm.  I  am  going  out 
of  the  world,  you  remain ;  which  is  better  is  known  to 
God." 

In  the  well-known  dialogue  between  Socrates  and  Alci- 
biades,  on  the  duties  of  religious  worship,  Alcibiades  is 
going  to  the  temple  to  pra}" ;  Socrates  meets  him  and  dis- 
suades him  from  prayer  on  account  of  his  inability  to  man- 
age the  duty  aright.  "  To  me,"  he  says,  "  it  seems  best  to 
be  quiet ;  it  is  necessary  to  wait  till  you  learn  how  you  ought 
to  behave  towards  the  gods  and  towards  man."  "And  when. 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  267 

0  Socrates!  shall  that  time  be,  and  who  will  instruct  me?" 
says  the  wondering  disciple,  "  for  gladly  would  I  see  this 
man  who  he  is."  "  He  is  one,"  replied  Socrates,  "  who  cares 
for  you;  but,  as  Homer  represents  Minerva  taking  away  the 
darkness  from  the  eyes  of  Diomedes  that  he  may  distinguish 
a  god  from  a  man,  so  it  is  necessary  that  he  should  first  take 
away  the  darkness  from  your  mind,  and  then  bring  near 
those  things  by  which  you  shall  know  good  and  evil."  "Let 
him  take  away,"  rejoins  Alcibiades,  "  if  he  will,  the  darkness 
or  any  other  thing,  for  I  am  prepared  to  decline  none  of  those 
things  which  are  commanded  by  him,  whoever  this  man  is, 
if  I  shall  be  made  better." 

Plato,  speaking  of  human  nature,  says,  "  I  have  heard 
from  the  wise  men  that  we  are  now  dead  and  the  body  is 
our  sepulcher."*  Again  he  says,  "  The  prime  evil  is  inborn 
in  souls;  it  is  implanted  in  men  to  sin."t  Again,  "The 
nature  of  mankind  is  greatly  degenerated  and  depraved  ;  all 
manner  of  disorders  infest  human  nature,  and  men,  being 
impotent,  are  torn  in  pieces  b}'  their  lusts  as  by  so  many 
wild  horses."J  He  also  speaks  of  an  "evil  nature,"  "an 
evil  in  nature,"  "a  disease  in  nature,"  "a  destruction  of 
harmony  in  the  soul."  Tracing  the  origin  of  this  diseased 
state,  he  says,  "  That  in  times  past  the  divine  nature  flour- 
ished in  men ;  but,  at  length,  being  mixed  with  mortal  cus- 
tom, it  fell  into  ruin ;  hence  an  inundation  of  evils  in  the 
race."§  Again,  "  The  cause  of  corruption  is  from  our 
parents,  so  that  we  never  relinquish  their  evil  way,  or  escape 
the  blemish  of  their  evil  habit."  ||  Also,  "  That  after  the 
golden  age  the  universe,  b}'  reason  of  that  confusion  that 
came  upon  it,  would  have  been  quite  dissolved  had  not  God 
again  taken  it  upon  him  to  sit  at  the  helm  and  govern  the 
world,  and  restore  its  disordered  and  almost  disjointed  parts 
to  their  primeval  order. "^ 

Seneca  speaks  quite  despairingly  of  our  possible  recovery 
by  any  means.      He  says,  "  Our  corrupt  nature  has  drunk  in 

*  Gorgias,  fol.  493.  f  Leg.  p.  731.  %  Politicus,  p.  274. 

I  Critias,  p.  400.  ||  Timseus,  103.  ^  Politicus,  251. 


268  NECESSITY  OF  A 

such  deep  draughts  of  iniquity,  which  are  so  far  incorporated 
in  its  very  howels  that  you  cannot  remove  it  save  by  tearing 
them  out."  And  yet  he  conceives,  in  the  faintest  manner, 
some  possibility  of  supernatural  aid.  "  No  man  is  able  to 
clear  himself;  let  some  one  give  him  a  hand;  let  some  one 
lead  him  out."*  He  also  says,  as  if  he  were  writing  out 
another  Yllth  chapter  of  the  Romans,  "What  is  it,  Lucilius, 
that,  when  we  set  ourselves  in  one  way,  draws  us  another, 
and  when  we  desire  to  avoid  any  course,  drives  us  into  it  ? 
What  is  it  that  so  wrestles  with  our  mind,  allowing  us  never 
to  settle  any  good  resolution  once  for  all  ?"t 

Ovid  also  joins  in  the  same  confession.  "If  I  could 
I  would  be  more  sane.  But  some  unknown  force  drags 
me  against  my  will.  Desire  draws  me  one  way,  con- 
viction another.  I  see  the  better  and  approve,  the  worse  I 
follow."! 

Thus  also  Xenophanes  closes  off  his  work  on  nature  in  these 
words :  "  '^o  man  has  discovered  any  certainty,  nor  will  dis- 
cover it,  concerning  the  gods,  and  what  I  say  of  the  uni- 
verse. For  if  he  uttered  what  is  even  more  perfect,  still  he 
does  not  know  it,  but  conjecture  hangs  over  all." 

Pliny,  confessing  the  wretched  hunger  of  his  soul,  saw  no 
relief  to  it  better  than  suicide.  "  It  is  difficult,"  he  writes, 
"  to  say  whether  it  might  not  be  better  for  men  to  be  wholly 
without  religion  than  to  have  one  of  this  kind  [viz.  that  of 
his  country],  which  is  a  reproach  to  its  object.  The  vanity 
of  man,  and  his  insatiable  longing  after  existence,  have  led 
him  also  to  dream  of  a  life  after  death.  A  being  full  of  con- 
tradictions, he  is  the  most  wretched  of  creatures,  since  the 
other  creatures  have  no  wants  transcending  the  bounds  of 
their  nature;  man  is  full  of  desires  and  wants  that  reach  to 
infinity,  and  can  never  be  satisfied.  Among  these  so  great 
evils,  the  best  thing  God  has  bestowed  on  man  is  the  power 
to  take  his  own  life."§ 

Clement,  the  Roman,  tells  us  how  he  was  harassed  from 
childhood  by  questions  which  paganism  could  not  help  him 

*  Ep.  52.        t  Ep.  52.        X  Metam.  vii.  18.         g  Hist.  Nat.,  lib.  vii. 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  269 

to  answer :  such  as  relate  to  his  being  and  immortality,  the 
origin  of  the  world  and  its  continuance,  when  it  began,  when 
it  will  end,  and  whither  his  present  life  is  to  carry  him. 
"  Incessantly  haunted,"  he  says,  "  by  such  thoughts  as  these, 
which  came  I  knew  not  whence,  I  was  sorely  troubled,  so 

that  I  grew  pale  and  emaciated I  resorted  to  the 

schools  of  the  philosophers,  hoping  to  find  some  certain  foun- 
dation. I  saw  nothing  but  the  piling  up  and  tearing  down 
of  theories.  Thus  was  I  driven  to  and  fro  by  the  diiferent 
representations,  and  forced  to  conclude  that  things  appear 
not  as  they  are  in  themselves,  but  as  they  happen  to  be 
presented  on  this  or  that  side.  I  was  made  dizzier  than 
ever,  and  from  the  bottom  of  my  heart  sighed  for  deliver- 
ance."* 

Such  is  nature's  longing  for  something  greater  than  nature's 
light.  To  see  the  necessity  of  a  divine  revelation,  we  have 
only  to  look  to  ancient  and  modern  paganism.  The  question 
is  not  what  natural  religion  can  do,  but  what  it  has  done. 
Has  it  made  clear  the  unity  of  God  ?  Look  to  the  innumer- 
able idols  adored  of  heathen  lands  !  Has  it  made  manifest  the 
moral  perfections  of  God  ?  Look  to  the  idol  gods  where 
Christianity  does  not  exist!  What  their  character!  Who 
knows  not,  that  has  made  himself  acquainted  with  their  his- 
tory, that  they  personified  every  vice  most  degrading  to  hu- 
manity ?  Has  natural  religion  given  any  consistent  ideas  of 
a  future  state  ?  Look  to  the  sensual  paradise  of  Mohammed, 
the  elysium  for  heroes  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  mytholo- 
gist  ?  Look  to  the  Druids'  home  for  warriors,  and  the  bloody 
hall  of  Odin  !  Has  natural  religion  established  a  good  code 
of  morals  ?  Consult  the  heathen  bible  for  the  virtues  of  hu- 
mility, of  disinterested  benevolence,  of  supreme  love  to  God  ! 
Has  it  defined  the  nature  of  virtue  ?  Look  to  the  innumer- 
able speculations  of  pagan  writers !  Amid  uncertainty  so 
great,  how  needful  a  divine  revelation  ! 

The  world  has  had  a  fair  experiment  of  what  it  could  and 
would  do  without  it.     As  age  after  age  rplled  on,  every  form 

*  Neander's  Hist.,  vol.  i.  pp.  32,  33. 


270  NECESSITY  OF  A 

of  superstition  was  tried,  and  every  device  of  man  had  an 
opportunity  for  development.  But  how  melancholy  the 
record  of  history  !  The  great  empires  of  the  earth  rose  and 
fell,  and  nation  and  individual  evinced  no  self-restoring  power. 
In  the  deepest  darkness  of  mind  millions  went  to  the  grave; 
but  the  grave  itself  was  not  so  gloomy  as  those  living  waves 
of  spiritual  death  that  rolled  their  dark  waters  over  the 
hopeless  fabrics  of  human  science  and  learning.  Philos- 
ophy tried  her  utmost;  and  there  arose  in  the  academy 
giants  in  intellect,  but  they  resembled  only  the  lurid 
flashes  of  the  thunder-storm  that  but  revealed  more 
vividly  the  surrounding  darkness.  Legislation  and  civil 
power  tried  their  utmost  to  stem  the  tide  of  human  cor- 
ruption. Dreading  the  mischief  of  atheism,  and  the  pas- 
sions unrestrained,  the  lovers  of  humanity,  appealing  to  the 
religious  principle  of  our  natures,  enthroned  superstition  in 
marble  palaces,  and  gave  to  idol  worship  the  great  seal  of 
state ;  but  religion  itself  became  corrupt  as  the  grave,  and 
virtue  expired  upon  the  sacrificial  altar.  Then  came  the 
appeal  to  the  love  of  the  beautiful,  and  humanity  was  tried 
to  see  if  beauty  and  goodness  would  coalesce.  Painting  and 
statuary,  such  as  man  never  had  seen,  adorned  the  temples 
of  Athens,  and  Corinth  and  Rome  became  majestic  with 
those  famed  structures  of  art  that  every  succeeding  age  has 
only  imitated  to  fail  in.  But  the  beautiful  neither  explained 
virtue  nor  enforced  it,  it  gave  no  better  idea  of  G-od,  and  the 
golden  age  of  beauty  and  art  did  but  reveal  a  deeper  abyss  of 
human  corruption  and  helplessness.  The  temple  to  the  un- 
known God  was  the  only  temple  destitute  of  a  worshiper,  and 
the  highest  age  of  civilization,  even  as  the  darkest  abode  of 
savage  existence,  all  proclaimed  the  necessity  of  a  revelation 
from  God. 

But  to  see  in  the  clearest  light  the  absolute  need  for  man's 
highest  welfare  that  God  should  give  a  revelation,  let  us  in- 
terrogate the  oracles  of  natural  religion  to  see  if  there  is  a 
satisfactory  explanation  to  the  question,  the  most  important 
that  man  can  ask,  How  can  man  be  just  with  God  ? 

It  is  the  peculiar  glory  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  to  answer 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  271 

this  question,  and  enforce,  by  every  variety  of  illustration,  the 
divinely  instituted  remedy  for  sinners.  The  question  before 
us  to  consider  is.  Does  natural  religion  explain  and  make 
intelligent  an  effectual  remedy  for  sin  ?  Does  the  light  of 
nature  show  how  man  can  be  just  with  God?  To  show  most 
clearly  the  necessity  of  a  revelation  from  God,  we  are  not 
compelled  to  prove  that  the  light  of  nature  in  no  sense  can 
make  known  an  atonement  for  sin.  Even  admitting  that 
there  could  be  some  intimations  of  the  mode  by  which  God 
may  be  just  and  yet  save  sinners,  yet  the  great  difficulty  to 
be  met  is, — has,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  natural  religion  in  any 
true  sense  made  intelligent  and  satisfactory  to  the  mind  a 
mode  by  which  a  just  God  in  consistency  with  his  law  can 
pardon  and  save  sinners  ?  J/*  so,  then  we  believe  one  great 
design  of  a  revelation  from  God  is  useless  ;  but  if  not  so,  then 
we  have  the  highest  possible  evidence  of  our  need  of  a  divine 
revelation.  It  is  not  necessai-y  to  enter  into  the  intricacies  of 
the  question,  what,  on  this  subject,  natural  religion  may  re- 
veal. We  intend  to  wander  into  no  speculations  upon  this 
point,  but  to  confine  our  remarks  to  fact,  and  fact  alone. 
But  in  reasoning  upon  facts,  two  important  ways  are  needful 
to  arrive  at  a  right  decision.  First,  arguments  adduced  from 
admitted  principles,  which,  in  themselves,  are  facts, — then  a 
consultation  of  history  of  what  has  actually  taken  place.  By 
this  course,  we  have  two  chains  to  strengthen  our  argument, — 
right  theory,  and  the  results  of  that  theory.  A  physician,  in 
prescribing  for  his  patient,  must  have  a  correct  theory  in  his 
mind  of  the  nature  and  cause  of  the  supposed  disease,  and 
then  he  must  know,  to  a  good  extent,  what  is  actually  the 
disease.  His  correct  theory  will  tell  him  what  medicine  to 
give,  and  his  knowledge  of  the  actual  state  of  the  disease, 
when  to  give  the  medicine.  In  the  same  manner  are  we  to 
investigate  the  question.  How  can  we  from  the  light  of  na- 
ture learn?  How  can  man  be  just  with  God?  The  neces- 
sity of  a  revelation  from  God  is  evident  in  other  important 
respects.  Great  and  many  are  the  reasons  why  we  should 
welcome  it,  apart  from  its  wonderful  disclosure  of  the  only 
way  a  sinner  can  be  saved;  but  here  peculiarly  we  would  rest 


272  NECESSITY  OF  A 

our  argument  for  the  absolute  need  of  the  Bible  that  brings 
life  and  immortality  to  light. 

God,  conscience,  and  man  a  sinner,  are  admitted :  natural 
religion  shows  as  much  as  this.  How  are  we  from  these 
truths  to  arrive  at  the  result  that  God  can  pardon  the  sinner, 
and  will  do  it  ?  Let  it  be  remembered  we  now  are  to  shut 
our  Bibles,  and  go  to  work  without  the  light  that  comes  to  us 
from  the  sacred  page,  to  show  how  God  can  or  will  pardon 
and  save  a  rebel  against  his  law.  It  is  confessed  that  God  is 
just,  but  the  first  principle  of  justice  is  to  punish  sin  ;  but  if 
God  is  just,  he  must  have  a  just  law.  What,  then,  is  the  voice 
of  divine  law  ?  Does  it  not  pronounce  punishment  to  the 
sinner  ?  Does  it  not  give  a  reward  to  the  obedient  ?  What 
is  our  first  idea  of  human  law  ?  Is  it  not  a  command  with  a 
penalty  attached  for  disobedience  ?  But  is  that  penalty  re- 
pentance ?  Is  repentance  the  punishment  threatened  the  vio- 
lator of  human  law?  Is  contrition  for  sin  and  amendment 
for  life  the  penalty  denounced  by  human  tribunals  against 
those  who  transgress  the  law  of  the  state  ?  Certainly  not. 
For  no  human  government  could  stand  a  day  with  law  sus- 
tained by  such  terms.  But  is  advice  the  penalty  of  human 
law  ?  When  a  thief  steals  our  property,  or  an  assassin  mur- 
ders a  citizen  of  a  state,  and  before  the  legal  tribunal  is  con- 
victed of  the  same,  is  the  penalty  for  his  transgression  ad- 
vice ?  Are  they  told  to  do  better  for  the  future,  not  again  to 
transgress  the  law,  and  then  dismissed  to  their  former  state 
of  freedom?  But  what  law  upon  such  a  condition  could 
command  respect  or  have  any  existence  ?  Our  idea  of  law  is 
evil  or  punishment  inflicted  upon  its  violation.  Repentance 
and  advice  have  nothing  to  do  with  law.  Law  does  not  re- 
cognize such  language  as  appropriate  penalties.  As  repent- 
ance or  advice  cannot  wipe  away  sin,  so  are  they  equally 
ineffectual  to  sustain  the  sanctions  of  human  authority.  But 
what  is  true  of  the  law  of  man,  must,  for  the  same  reason,  be 
true  of  divine  law.  It  is  no  more  sensible  to  disrobe  the  law 
of  God  of  its  penalty,  than  human  law.  If  the  law  of  man 
could  not  exist  with  no  penalty,  equally  true  divine  law  could 
not.     If  we  would  consider  human  government  as  a  mockery, 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  273 

with  no  penalty  for  disobedience  than  repentance  and  advice, 
even  so  must  we  look  upon  divine  government.  There  must 
be,  with  the  one  as  with  the  other,  punishment  for  disobe- 
dience. But  if  that  government,  be  it  human  or  divine,  is 
just,  then  the  lawgiver,  for  the  same  reason  he  rewards  the 
obedient,  must  inflict  punishment  on  the  disobedient.  But 
there  is  a  higher  argument  for  this  in  conscience.  What 
does  conscience  say?  Is  not  the  first  lesson  she  teaches  us 
the  lesson  that  sin  deserves  punishment  ?  Does  she  not  con- 
demn us  for  sin  ?  Does  she  say  to  the  sinner.  You  may  de- 
fraud, or  commit  perjury,  or  violence  upon  the  person  of 
your  neighbor,  if  you  but  repent  of  it  ?  Are  good  advice  and 
repentance  the  penalties  she  attaches  to  sin  ?  Certainly  not. 
Conscience  shows  us  our  sins  and  their  desert  of  punishment, 
and  there  she  stops.  She  can  go  no  farther  than  denounce  sin, 
and  with  the  verdict  she  pronounces,  if  guilty,  give  to  it  a 
present  punishment,  even  as  a  gloomy  foreboding  of  future 
evil. 

Look,  then,  to  the  sinner  as  self-condemned  by  his  own 
conscience.  What  does  the  light  of  nature  teach  him  as  a 
remedy  for  his  sin?  Is  it  repentance?  But  still  the  sinner 
asks  the  question,  How  can  this  save  me  under  a  just  God  ? 
Still  the  sinner  instinctively  interrogates  his  conscience. 
How  would  it  do  for  a  human  law  to  have  such  a  penalty  for 
transgression  ?  Still  he  asks  the  question,  Provided  God  did 
save  from  punishment  upon  such  a  condition,  what  is  to  be- 
come of  his  law  ?  what  of  respect  for  his  authority  ?  We  ask 
nature,  and  seek  for  all  the  light  she  can  bring  us  from  natu- 
ral religion,  to  extricate  us  from  this  difficulty.  We  demand 
something  to  satisfy  our  minds,  to  appease  the  reproaches  of 
conscience,  sensible  of  sin  and  a  violation  of  God's  law,  that 
must  demand  a  perfect  obedience.  As  we  have  no  divine 
revelation  to  go  to,  showing  to  us  a  crucified  Saviour  offered 
to. the  acceptance  and  salvation  of  all  upon  faith  and  love,  we 
wish,  shut  up  alone  to  the  Book  of  !N"ature,  to  have  natural 
reliffion  teach  us  the  o-reat  truth  of  an  atonement  for  sin. 
We  have  already  come  to  the  conclusion  that  repentance,  or 

18 


274  NECESSITY  OF  A 

good  resolutions,  or  any  effort  for  future  obedience,  cannot 
save  us  guilty. 

We  have  decided  that  if  human  law  cannot  be  sustained 
by  such  sanctions,  certainly  divine  law  cannot.  If  God  is 
just,  then  the  more  just  the  more  certain  the  penalty  of  pun- 
ishment. We  wish  now  to  know  from  nature's  light  our 
remedy.  We  wish  to  solve  the  greatest  of  difficulties, — a  just 
God  and  a  sinner  saved.  No  such  mysterious  anomaly  as 
this  can  we  find  in  human  government.  She  utters  no  other 
voice  than.  Obey  or  be  jM/iished.  No  light  does  conscience 
throw  upon  this  question.  With  tenfold  energy  she  reite- 
rates the  voice  of  law.  Obey  or  be  jyunished.  Again  do  we  in- 
terrogate nature.  We  ask,  How  may  we  be  savedbfrom  sin? 
The  response  comes  back  to  us,  cheerless  as  the  grave.  Obey 
or  be  punished.  Here  we  are  in  a  worse  than  Egyptian  dark- 
ness ;  but  the  instinct  of  preservation  will  catch  at  every  straw 
that  floats  upon  the  troubled  sea  of  human  existence.  Our 
theory  gives  us  no  hope ;  its  conclusions,  from  admitted  prin- 
ciples, irresistible,  reveal  no  remedy :  as  a  last  resort  we 
turn  to  the  history  of  man  as  actually  revealed.  The  ques- 
tion now  is.  Is  there,  throwing  theory  away,  any  clearly  re- 
vealed remedy  for  sin  in  nature's  works  or  in  the  facts  of 
human  history  ?  Remember,  we  are  not  to  bring  in  revela- 
tion to  help  us  out  of  our  difficulty.  The  question  is,  Can 
w^e  get  out  of  it  without  revelation  ? 

By  one  process  of  argument  I  have  shown  we  cannot;  I 
am  now  to  resort  to  another  kind  of  argument,  drawn  from 
existing  facts  in  the  works  of  nature  and  man's  history.  The 
doctrine  of  revelation  is,  that  Christ,  being  a  divine  and  per- 
fect substitute  for  sin,  has  sustained  the  claims  of  justice  vio- 
lated, and  made  it  consistent  with  God  to  save  the  sinner  in 
harmony  -with  a  perfect  moral  law.  In  other  words,  it  points 
out  a  way  by  which  the  law  can  be  honored  and  yet  the 
sinner  saved.  The  question  is.  Can  we  find  out  from  nature's 
works  and  the  history  of  man  a  remedy  for  sin  ?  Is  there 
an  intelligible  and  clear  mode  made  known,  except  in  reve- 
lation, of  the  way  in  which  a  sinner,  in  consistency  with  a 
just  law,  can  be  saved  ?    We  will  give  the  widest  latitude  of 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  275 

range,  the  most  liberal  concession  to  the  inquirer  after  the 
solution    of  this  great  problem  of  human  destiny  without 
revelation.     We  will  sa}-,  You  may  go  wherever  your  reason 
or  imagination  may  lead  you  to  find  out  how  a  sinner,  under 
a  perfect  moral  government,  can  be  saved  in  consistency  with 
divine  law.     "Where  can  a  divine  substitute  for  sin  be  found? 
Search  the  records  of  nature.     Let  the  inquirer  have,  as  far 
as  possible,  the  benefit  of  the  argument  derived   from  the 
principle  of  substitution  seen  in  the  violation  of  natural  law, 
by  which  we  see  where  a  bone  is  broken,  or  the  flesh  cut,  or 
the  human  system  prostrated  by  disease,  that  nature,  by  a 
mysterious  power,  exerts  herself  to  repair  the  mischief  occa- 
sioned.    Let  the  most  be  made  out  of  the  principle  of  substi- 
tution seen  in  human  life,  where  a  mother  saves  by  her  own 
pains  the  life  of  her  son,  or  a  father  wearies  himself  with  toil 
to   provide  for   his   family.     Let  us  give  due  credit  to  the 
thousand   instances   of  suffering  for  the  benefit   of  others, 
and  that  mighty  principle  that  runs  through  all  society,  of 
averting  by  others  those  evils  that  otherwise  would  fall  upon 
ourselves.     Here,  indeed,  is  substitution  of  a  certain  nature 
seen.     As  a  greater  illustration  of  the  principle  of  substitu- 
tion, let   the    inquirer  of  nature    point  us  to   the  sacrifices 
innumerable  of  mankind  in  all  ages  of  bloody  victims  upon 
the  altar  to  propitiate  the  favor  or  avert  the  anger  of  heathen 
divinities.   And  yet  where  do  we  find  any  satisfactory  evidence 
of  a  substitute  for  sin  of  such  a  character  as  to  avert  from  the 
sinner  the  punishment  of  sin  ?     We  see  sin  followed  by  pun- 
ishment in  this  world ;  why  may  it  not  be  in  the   future  ? 
When  we  have  given  the  most  favorable  construction  to  a 
remedial  system,  existing  to  a  limited  extent,  to  avoid  natural 
evil,  what   assurance  have  we  from  nature  of  a  system  of 
redemption  for  the  lost  sinner?     After  gleaning  up  all  the 
favorable  evidences  we  can  to  throw  light  upon  the  problem, 
How  can  God  be  just  and  the  sinner  saved  ?  how  much  is  the 
darkness  removed  ?     Search  the  world  over  with  no  Bible, 
and  to   what   is   the    sinner  directed  as    a   ground  of  hope 
that   he   may  be  saved?     We  have  already  seen   that   we 
cannot  look  to  repentance  as  a  valid  foundation  to  rest  upon. 


•276  NECESSITY  OF  A 

We  must  look  to  some  principle  of  substitution,  some  person 
who  can  bear  our  sins  and  sustain  himself  a  broken  law. 
But  we  wish  to  find  out  where  that  substitution  is  in  nature, 
and  the  remedy  for  our  wants  that  is  presented.  We  cer- 
tainly cannot  delude  ourselves  with  the  idea  that  brute  ani- 
mals can  save  us  from  the  punishment  of  sin.  What  value 
in  their  blood  to  avert  the  sword  of  divine  justice  ?  We 
cannot  look  to  a  mortal  man  like  ourselves  for  a  remedy ;  he 
cannot,  as  a  sinner,  save  himself,  much  less  save  us.  ^  We 
cannot  look  for  an  atonement  to  the  collective  purity  or  good- 
ness of  any  number  of  men,  in  any  age  or  every  age.  No 
human  goodness  can  cancel  the  sin  of  a  single  day,  much  less 
the  sins  of  a  whole  life.  Let  us,  then,  search  the  world  over 
to  see  if  we  can  find  a  perfect  being,  one  who  never  has 
sinned.  I  will  suppose  that  such  a  spotless  illustration  of 
humanity  has  actually  been  found:  I  will  suppose  that  one 
man,  escaping  every  taint  of  corruption  and  as  pure  as  Adam 
unfallen,  has  been  discovered.  Let  us  make  him  an  atone- 
ment for  our  sins.  But  can  we  do  it?  He  can  save  himself 
only  when  perfect  in  obeying  divine  law ;  as  a  subject  of  law, 
all  he  can  do  is  to  obey  law.  What  works  of  supererogation 
has  he  to  oft'set  the  sins  of  mankind?  What  can  he  do  to 
avert  from  a  single  sinner  the  penalty  of  law?  He  can  do 
nothino;.  We  must  2:0  to  a  source  hio-her  even  than  law 
itself;  we  must  mount  to  a  height  of  dignity  so  loft}',  that 
law,  even  like  the  clouds  that  encircle  the  earth,  is  tran- 
scended by  the  majestic  summit  that  towers  above  in  the 
heavens.  Where  does  the  light  of  nature  show  us  such  a 
substitute  ?  Where,  except  in  revelation,  do  we  find  the 
anomaly  of  God  and  man  united, — of  humanity  to  suffer  for 
our  sins,  and  divinity'  to  honor  the  law  ?  Where  in  nature 
do  we  find  one  person  possessing  traits  so  diverse  and  so 
peculiar,  that  every  claim  of  the  Godhead  and  yet  every 
interest  of  man  are  blended  together  in  harmony  ? 

Here  is  conscience,  in  the  heart  of  man,  condemning  for 
sin,  but  we  ask  in  vain  of  her  for  a  remedy.  She  shows  us 
our  ruin,  but  no  way  of  escaping  from  it.  Here  is  divine 
law  speaking  the  same  language  that  human  law  does, — that 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  277 

repentance  or  future  obedience  is  no  atonement  for  sin. 
Here  is  man  in  liis  historj',  in  every  age,  experiencing  the 
evils  of  sin,  and  yet  in  vain  striving  to  satisfy  the  claims  of 
justice  by  the  sacrifice  of  animals  or  the  bodily  tortures  of 
self-immolation.  Where,  with  no  revelation  to  guide  us,  is 
the  remedy  for  sin?  We  will  consult  the  nations  of  antiquity. 
Upon  the  fertile  plain  of  Dura,  where  the  ancient  Assyrian 
worshiped,  is  the  temple  of  Babel, — long  is  that  procession 
that  ascends  the  steps  of  Babylon's  great  tower.  Here  are 
worshiped  the  sun,  and  moon,  and  stars;  but  in  these 
heathen  rites  do  we  find  a  remedy  for  sin  ?  Again,  we  visit 
the  land  of  the  ancient  Canaauite,  and  see  a  ferocious  multi- 
tude shouting  at  the  infant  cry  tliat  ascends  from  the  bloody 
arms  of  Moloch.  Is  it  here  we  find  consolation  for  a  troubled 
conscience  ?  Now,  in  famed  Epliesus,  we  view  the  great 
temple  of  Diana,  the  wonder  of  the  world;  but  in  the  pro- 
fane scenes  there  witnessed  do  we  find  a  relief  to  the  mind  ? 
Disgusted  with  the  impure  and  cruel  homage  paid  to  idols, 
we  turn  to  the  schools  of  the  philosophers  and  visit  the  quiet 
scenes  of  the  Academy  and  the  Porch.  Here  is  the  collected 
wisdom  of  the  world  ;  here  the  learned  few  come  to  specu- 
late upon  the  mysterious  problem  of  human  destiny.  We 
listen,  with  eager  interest,  to  the  sages  of  the  old  world, — but 
the  first  of  all  truths — of  an  Infinite  God,  the  Creator  of  the 
universe  from  nothing— is  not  settled  ;  all  the  boasted  philoso- 
phy of  centuries  of  learning  commences  in  a  fundamental 
error, — the  denial  of  a  Creator  of  matter  and  spirit.  From 
nothing  nothing  can  come,  is  that  axiom  of  delusion  that 
alike  subverted  the  in:in-iortality  of  the  soul  and  the  infinite 
wisdom  and  power  of  one  Supreme  God. 

AVe  wish  to  find  out  the  nature  of  virtue,  but  of  the  three 
hundred  definitions  given,  not  one  includes  humility  or 
disinterested  benevolence.  We  inquire,  What  is  the  chief 
end  of  man  ?  The  Epicurean  places  it  in  pleasure, — the 
Stoic,  in  the  suppression  of  our  natural  sympathies.  We 
ask  for  the  evidence  of  a  future  state.  The  disciples  of 
Pythagoras  speak  to  us  of  the  transmigration  of  souls  into 
diflerent  animals,  and  those  of  Plato  of  the  existence  of  souls 


278  NECESSITY  OF  A 

before  the  world.  We  ask,  Who  are  the  favored  residents  of 
heaven?  and  we  are  pointed  to  warriors  whose  fatal  violence 
has  desolated  the  earth,  and  made  by  revenge  and  craft  un- 
numbered beings  most  miserable  and  degraded. 

Bewildered  amid  contradictions  so  great,  and  errors  so 
many,  upon  the  plainest  truths  of  Christianity,  we  try  once 
more  to  see  what  light  the  filmed  seats  of  human  learning 
and  art  could  throw  upon  the  most  practical  and  most  inter- 
esting of  all  questions,  How  can  man  be  just  with  God  ?  But, 
instead  of  one  God  of  infinite,  natural,  and  moral  perfection, 
we  are  pointed  to  a  thousand  subordinate  divinities,  and  we 
must  fi.rst  balance  our  accounts  with  them  before  even  we 
may  presume  to  think  of  the  presiding  deity  of  the  pagan 
Pantheon  ;  and  then,  when  we  have  reached  the  last  of  the 
gods,  what  do  we  find?  A  being  having  no  interest  in  his 
creatures,  and  so  absorbed  in  himself  as  to  leave  to  others  the 
management  of  human  affairs.  But,  worse  than  this,  the  very 
vices  that  conscience  upbraids  us  for  are  deified  in  gods,  not 
to  worship  which  is  a  state  offense.  "N^eed  it  be  said  that  w^e 
may  try  in  vain  to  find  out  anything  upon  the  greatest  of 
truths,  when  even  the  alphabet  of  a  divine  revelation  is 
unknown  ? 

Let  us  then  interrogate  every  other  religion  but  that  of  the 
Bible  fi)r  an  answer  to  the  question.  How  shall  man  be  just 
with  God?  We  will  leave  the  pagan  rites  of  the  South  Sea 
Islander,  and  the  dark  atrocities  of  those  cannibal  supersti- 
tions that  degrade  the  Malay  and  the  Patagonian  to  the  level 
of  the  brute  ;  we  will  not  rehearse  the  story  of  those  Mexican 
priests  whose  temples,  dedicated  to  the  god  of  war  and  the 
hosts  of  heaven,  struck  terror  in  the  heart  of  the  stern  Span- 
iard when  he  viewed  the  skulls  of  thousands  of  victims 
offered  in  bloody  sacrifices  to  their  sanguinary  deities ;  we 
will  go  to  those  better  religions,  venerable  for  their  existence 
through  long  centuries,  and  holding  in  their  iron  grasp  mil- 
lions of  worshipers.  But  we  appeal  in  vain  for  any  light  to 
show  how,  as  sinners,  we  may  be  saved,  to  the  devotees  of  the 
Grand  Lama,  or  that  vast  empire  of  China  whose  onlj-  Bible 
consists  in  the  principles  of   Confucius.     We  then  turn  to 


REVELATION  FROM  GOD.  279 

Mohammedanism,  stretching  its  glooni}^  sway  over  the  fairest 
roirions  of  Africa  and  the  o-reat  continent  of  Asia;  bnt  tlie 
Koran  gives  to  us  a  morality  without  love,  and  a  religion 
without  faith  ;  propagated  by  the  sword,  it  is  no  less  cruel  in 
its  practice  than  corrupt  in  its  rewards ;  offering  no  true 
atonement  for  sin,  it  gives  no  other  pardon  than  a  home  for 
sensualists. 

Finally,  as  a  last  resort,  we  will  go  to  the  evangelists  of 
intidelity  and  read  over  the  acts  of  the  apostles  of  Deism. 
Perhaps  these  new  lights  can  tell  us  something  better  than 
the  Bible,  and  prove  how  useless  to  us  is  a  revelation  from 
God.  But  who  of  this  Ishmael  army  of  infidels  shall  be  our 
authoritative  standard  of  belief  and  practice?  Shall  we  take 
Spinoza,  or  Strauss?  But  the  one  proves  out  the  universe 
God,  the  other  God  is  the  universe.  Shall  we,  flying  from 
this  German  abyss  of  speculative  nonsense,  resort  to  the  more 
intelligent  epistles  of  Voltaire  or  Rousseau?  But  the  fonner, 
fighting  all  his  lifetime  against  religion,  died  in  the  arms  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church;  and  the  other,  a  notorious 
debauchee,  died,  saying,  "0  God,  I  give  thee  my  soul,  pure 
and  untainted  as  it  came  from  thy  hands  !" 

Shall  we  go  to  the  English  school  of  infidels?  Lord  Herbert 
declares  lust  and  passion  no  more  blameworthy  than  thirst 
and  hunger.  Hobbes  denied  any  real  distinction  between 
right  and  wrong.  Lord  Bolingbroke  placed  the  chief  hap- 
piness of  man  in  the  gratification  of  the  sensual  nature. 
Hume  declared  self-denial  and  humility  positive  vices.  If  the 
first  principles  of  morality  are  denied,  who  among  these 
Ishmaelites  of  absurd  confusion,  can  tell  us  how  a  just  God 
can  pardon  a  sinner  ? 

We  are  driven  to  revelation  alone  for  an  answer  to  this 
question.  There  and  there  only  is  the  great  problem  of  human 
destiny  solved;  and  if  we  find  it  not  there  we  find  it  in  no 
other  place. 

Here  do  we  take  our  stand,  and  show,  by  an  argument 
that  must  be  irresistible  to  every  reasoning,  upright  mind, 
the  infinite  necessity  of  a  revelation  from  God, — a  necessity 
based  upon  the  deepest  wants  of  our  nature, — a  necessity  so 


280     NECESSITY  OF  A  REVELATION  FROM  GOD. 

great  that,  if  revelation  is  not  true,  there  is  uot  oue  ray  of 
light  to  cheer  the  wretched  family  of  man, — a  necessity  such 
as  our  nature,  spiritual  and  immortal,  must,  if  it  ever  does 
awake  to  its  destitution,  feel  too  mighty  for  language  to  de- 
scribe,— a  necessity  so  commanding,  that  it  would  be  high 
treason  to  God  to  disavow,  and  an  act  of  perjury  to  con- 
science to  deny. 

What,  then,  is  the  gospel  remedy  for  sin  ?  How  does  it 
teach  justification  with  Grod?  All  is  summed  up  in  the 
words,  "  Where  sin  hath  abounded,  grace  doth  much  more 
abound."  The  advent,  life,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ 
have  introduced  us  into  an  economv  of  cjrace.  Law  is  sus- 
tained  by  the  great  Mediator;  justice  is  satisfied.  The  sinner 
is  saved  not  because  he  comes  up  to  that  which  the  law  de- 
mands, but  simply  that  he  fnlfills  the  conditions  of  grace. 
The  language  of  law  is,  Do  and  live ;  of  grace.  Live  and  do. 
Law  says.  Obey  perfectly,  and  you  shall  be  saved ;  grace  says. 
Believe  in  Christ,  and  you  shall  be  saved.  The  obedience  of 
the  one  is  legal;  of  the  other,  evangelical.  The  obedience 
of  the  law  is  alike  impossible  and  hopeless.  Try  ever  so 
hard,  and  you  come  short  of  it.  Go  through  with  self-in- 
flicted tortures,  but  these  do  not  save.  Make  the  most  of 
your  merits  and  good  works,  but  they  cannot  come  up  to  the 
standard  of  divine  law.  But  salvation  by  grace  honors  the 
law,  because  it  secures  what  the  law  does  not, — the  obedience 
of  love.  Our  sins  had  dug  for  us  a  gulf  fathomless  in  wretch- 
edness; they  had  erected  a  wall  of  separation  between  us 
and  God,  high  as  heaven  and  deep  as  perdition;  but  the  vi- 
carious sacrifice  of  Christ  bridges  over  that  gulf,  surmounts 
that  wall,  gives  to  us  an  open  communication  with  heaven. 
The  mystery  of  the-  cross  angels  desire  to  look  into,  for  the 
cross  averts  from  our  heads  the  sword  of  justice,  bids  the 
trembling  sinner  hope  even  unto  the  end,  banishes  from  the 
soul  despair,  assures  him  that  justification,  impossible  by  law, 
is  possible  by  Christ,  and  bids  him  seize  the  outstretched 
hand  of  the  angel  of  hope,  and,  from  the  deepest  hell  of  his 
own  corruptions,  to  ascend  up  to  the  highest  heaven  of  God's 
love. 


CHAPTER   11. 


CHRIST. 


The  birth,  life,  death,  and  resurrection  of  Christ  are  the 
foundation  of  all  revelation  ;  consequently  the  all-important 
question  at  once  presents  itself  to  the  mind.  Is  Christ  that 
which  he  professes  himself  to  be  ?  Is  he  the  Son  of  God  ? 
Does  he  truly  establish  his  claims  to  be  heard  and  obeyed  by 
works  that  prove  him  to  be  all  that  the  Bible  asserts  ? 

First,  consider,  is  Christ  merely  a  fiction  of  the  imagina- 
tion, a  brilliant  idea  of  an  unreal  personage  got  up  by  enthu- 
siasts or  intentional  deceivers  ?  There  have  been  those  who 
have  thought  thus, — some,  who  have  contrived  to  force 
themselves  into  the  belief  that  Christ  was  not  an  actual  per- 
son as  delineated,  but  one  invented  by  the  mind  for  a  certain 
end.  Suppose,  then,  to  prove  a  real  Christ  appearing  in 
the  world  at  the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era,  we 
follow  the  stream  of  time  back,  so  that  we  may  have  as  near 
a  view  as  possible  of  the  divine  author  of  Christianity.  TVe 
will  go  to  the  most  reliable  sources,  and  from  them  find  out 
the  solution  to  a  question  of  vast  interest.  Was  Christ  a 
fiction  or  a  reality,  a  person  or  a  painting? 

Nero's  persecution  of  the  Christians  took  place  in  the  sixty- 
fourth  and  sixty-fifth  years  of  oar  era.  The  execution  of 
Christ  by  Pilate  occurred  about  thirty-five  years  previously. 
As  Bayne,  in  his  work  on  the  testimony  of  Christ  to  Chris- 
tianity, has  well  said  :  "  This  Christ,  who  was  honored  in 
Rome  in  a  manner  so  transcendent,  in  a  manner  which,  on 
the  showing  of  Tacitus,  resembled  the  honor  paid  to  a  God, 
had  lived  only  so  long  before.  Whatever  time  is  required  to 
account  for  the  phenomenon  of  Christ's  worship  on  such  a 
scale  and  with  such  an  intensity,  is  rigidly  confined  within 
thirty-five  years.     If  legend  was   accumulated ;  if  incident 

(281) 


282      ■  CHRIST. 

was  exaggerated;  if  fable  was  invented;  if  a  real  individual 
was  invested  with  a  garment  of  myth ;  if  the  popular  im- 
a2:ination  surrounded  him  with  a  halo,  and  mao;nified  him 
into  a  divinity  ;  if  enthusiasm  contributed  its  colored  fancies, 
fanaticism  its  distempered  heat,  and  superstition  its  darker 
imagery, — the  whole  work  had  to  be  done  in  little  more  than 
the  number  of  years  which  now,  in  1862,  have  elapsed  since 
the  death  of  Walter  Scott." 

Let  us  now  turn  to  Tacitus,  the  Roman  historian,  and  care- 
fully read  over  those  words,  the  truth  of  which  is  undisputed. 
"  The  most  skeptical  criticism,"  says  Gibbon,  whose  au- 
thority in  such  a  case  is  absolutely  conclusive,  "  is  obliged  to 
respect  the  integrity  of  this  celebrated  passage  of  Tacitus." 
The  circumstances  are  thus  detailed  by  Tacitus : 

"N'ero  judiciall}'  accused  of  the  oflense  and  punished  with 
the  most  studied  torments  a  set  of  men,  hated  for  their 
wickedness,  who  were  commonly  called  Christians.  The 
author  of  that  sect  was  Christ,  who,  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius, 
sufiered  death  by  sentence  of  the  procurator  Pontius  Pilate. 
The  vile  superstition,  repressed  for  a  time,  again  broke  out, 
not  only  in  Judea,  the  nest  of  mischief,  but  in  the  city  also, 
whither  all  atrocious  and  scandalous  things  flow,  and  where 
all  flourish.  At  first  those  only  were  apprehended  who  con- 
fessed themselves  of  that  sect ;  afterward  a  vast  multitude 
discovered  by  them,  all  of  whom  were  condemned,  not  so 
much  for  the  crime  of  burning  the  city  as  for  their  enmity 
to  mankind.  Their  executions  were  so  contrived  as  to  ex- 
pose them  to  derision  and  contempt.  Some  were  covered 
with  the  skins  of  wild  beasts,  that  they  might  be  torn  to 
pieces;  some  crucified;  while  others,  having  been  daubed 
over  with  combustible  materials,  were  set  up  as  lights  in  the 
night-time,  and  thus  burned  to  death.  For  these  spectacles 
Nero  gave  his  own  gardens,  and  at  the  same  time  exhibited 
there  the  diversions  of  the  circus,  sometimes  standing  in  the 
crowd  as  a  spectator,  in  the  habit  of  a  charioteer,  and  at  other 
times  driving  a  chariot  himself;  until  at  length  these  men, 
though  really  criminal  and  deserving  exemplary  punishment, 
began  to  be  commiserated  as  people  who  were  destroyed  not 


CHRIST.  283 

out  of  regard  to  the  public  welfare,  but  only  to  gratify  the 
cruelty  of  one  man." 

Observe  this  great  fact.  Christ,  the  author  of  Christian! t}^, 
came  into  a  sin-loving  and  persecuting  world;  he  distinctly 
told  his  disciples  that  as  their  Master  was  treated  so  would 
the}'  be;  as  he  was  hated,  so  also  would  be  their  condition. 
The  disciples,  then,  of  Christ  were  not  deceived  as  to  the  real 
character  of  his  mission.  They  knew  that  the  opposition  of 
the  world  must  be  encountered,^its  contempt,  its  wrath,  its 
malice,  its  misapprehension  and  fiercest  attacks  upon  their 
persons,  property,  and  reputation.  jSTow,  this  passage  of  Taci- 
tus described  a  notorious  fact  within  thirty-iive  years  from 
Christ's  death. 

The  question  now  is.  Are  men  so  fond  of  fiction  as  to  suffer 
so  much  for  it,  knowing  it  to  be  such  ?  Who  can  say  that 
at  a  period  of  the  world  where  the  mind  was  peculiarly  re- 
tentive of  great  events  and  personages,  especially  if  of  recent 
existence,  where  the  scarcity  of  all  parchments  and  their  cost- 
liness made  it  of  the  first  importance  to  tell  of  facts  as  they 
really  took  place,  any  motive  could  exist  for  taking  up  with 
a  fictitious  Christ,  or  any  story  whatever  not  founded  on 
fact  ?  Remember,  thirty-five  years  was  a  very  short  time  in- 
deed to  fabricate  a  lie;  and  then,  when  that  lie  exposed  to 
persecution  and  death,  is  it  possible  that  it  could  be  success- 
ful ?  jSTow,  men  do  not  naturally  love  persecution,  igno- 
miny, or  death:  if  these  evils  are  encountered,  some  powerful 
motive  must  exist  to  induce  submission  to  them.  Tacitus 
distinctly  asserts  that  thousands  were  persecuted  and  put  to 
death  for  Christ,  because  they  believed  in  him,  and  openly 
professed  his  name.  Is  it  possible  that,  if  there  was  no 
Christ,  any  could  be  found  voluntarily  taking  up  with  that 
which  they  knew  was  false,  and  suffering  persecution  for 
such  an  end?  Is  it  possible  Christ's  disciples  would  give  up 
all  earthly  comfort,  peace,  or  reward,  for  only  the  fiction  of 
a  Christ?  The  supposition  that  they  were  sincere,  but  de- 
luded with  the  idea  of  a  Christ  when  there  was  no  Christ,  is 
equally  absurd.  They  had  too  much  at  stake  to  be  easily 
deceived:   deceit  was  their  ruin,  truth  their  salvation.     Did 


284  CHRIST. 

only  tbirtj-five  3'ears  elapse  and  yet  they  not  know  a  real 
person  from  a  fictitious  one,  especially  when  mistake  sub- 
jected them  to  all  manner  of  tribulations,  with  nothing  what- 
ever to  be  gained  by  it  ? 

But  let  us  consult  Jewish  accounts  of  Christ.  The  Talmud- 
ical  literature  of  the  second  century  gives  great  importance 
to  Christ's  miracles.  "  The  later  Jews,"  says  Mr.  Baden 
Powell,  in  "Essays  and  Reviews,"  "adopted  the  strange 
legend  of  the  Seplicr  Toldeth  Jeshu  (book  of  the  generation 
of  Jesus),  which  describes  his  miracles  substantially  as  in  the 
Gospels,  but  says  that  he  obtained  his  power  by  hiding  himself 
in  the  temple,  and  possessing  himself  of  the  secret  ineftable 
name  by  virtue  of  which  such  wonders  could  be  wrought." 

Mr.  Powell  quotes  also,  from  Limborch,  this  statement  of 
Orobio,  a  Jewish  writer: — "  Tbe  Jews  disbelieved,  not  be- 
cause they  denied  that  the  works  which  are  related  in  the 
Gospels  were  done  by  Jesus,  but  because  they  did  not  suffer 
themselves  to  be  persuaded  by  them  that  Jesus  was  the 
Messiah."  Here,  then,  we  have  Jewish  as  well  as  Roman 
testimony  to  the  fact  that  such  a  person  as  Christ  actually 
existed,  and  then  we  have  the  highest  proof  from  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  early  Christians  that  they  did  not  die  for  a  fiction, 
but  were  persuaded  on  the  best  of  evidence  that  Jesus  of 
]^azareth  lived,  taught,  and  died  to  save  men.  Such  a  per- 
son, then,  as  Christ,  suffered  and  died  under  Pontius  Pilate, 
the  Roman  governor.  For  more  than  eighteen  centuries  the 
Christian  Church  has  commemorated  his  death.  The  two 
sacraments  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  observed  by 
millions  through  all  these  centuries,  testify  to  the  most  unde- 
niable of  tacts,  that  Christ  did  live  and  die  as  narrated  by  the 
four  Evangelists. 

The  question  of  the  greatest  interest  now  presents  itself. 
What  was  the  personal  character  of  Christ,  both  intellectual 
and  moral  ?  We  will  look  simply  in  a  human  relation,  and 
for  argument's  sake  consider  him  as  we  would  any  man, 
to  testify  to  important  facts.  Certain  things  were  declared 
by  Christ  himself.  Was  Christ  competent  to  testify  to  these 
things  of  himself,  and  Avas  he  truthful  ?     If  incompetent,  he 


CHRIST.  285 

might  be  mistaken  ;  \^  untruthful,  he  certainly  deceived  ;  and  in 
either  case  we  cannot  credit  the  works  alleged  of  him. 
JSTotice,  then,  the  intellectnal  and  the  moral  character  of 
Christ,  because  upon  a  correct  idea  of  both  will  depend  the 
solution  of  all  the  difficulties  that  are  presented  in  his  pro- 
fessed works.  Volumes  innumerable  have  been  written 
upon  Christ's  character.  He  has  engrossed  the  thoughts  of 
the  purest  and  the  noblest  intellects  of  every  age,  and  yet  it 
may  be  said  with  the  greatest  truth  that  new  beauties  and 
new  wonders  are  presented  under  whatever  aspect  Christ  is 
viewed.  The  theme  is  utterly  inexhaustible.  We  may  view 
this  or  that  development  of  the  Saviour's  character,  and  yet  it 
rises  up  before  the  mind  with  such  a  mysterious  grandeur, 
such  a  sacred  majesty,  so  unapproachable  in  its  purity,  so 
profound  in  its  wisdom,  so  transparent  in  its  simplicity,  so 
unique  in  its  manifestation,  so  perfectly  consistent  and  true 
and  right,  that  infidels,  even  while  denying  his  supernatural 
nature  or  works,  have  confessed  with  amazement  his  tran- 
scendent excellence. 

In  a  single  chapter  but  very  little  can  be  said  of  the  charac- 
ter of  our  Saviour,  and  yet  enough  to  show  that  of  all  men 
Christ  had  an  intellect  of  the  clearest,  sharpest,  and  most 
wonderful  strength.  ISTot  one  cloud  of  error  passed  over  it. 
Sagacity  of  the  rarest  nature  distinguished  him.  Always 
self-possessed,  he  never  for  a  moment  was  at  a  loss  to  say 
the  right  word  at  the  right  time.  Christ  ever  manifested  the 
highest  wisdom.  He  outwitted  his  foes,  while  he  con- 
founded their  malice.  But  what  adds  peculiar  force  to  the 
mind  of  Christ  was  his  perfect  knowledge  of  that  which  he 
should  be  called  to  go  through  with.  He  was  prepared  for 
every  exigency,  because  he  knew  just  what  was  the  trial  of 
his  patience. 

It  is  impossible  to  look  to  the  intellect  of  Christ  without 
noticing  the  sharp  outline  of  those  features  that  gave  abso- 
lute distinctness  to  the  ideas  advanced,  and  appropriateness 
to  all  his  words.  The  four  Evangelists  dwell  mostly  upon  the 
three  last  years  of  his  life ;  they  give  us  only  a  few  hints  of 
the  period  of  his  infancy  and  youth.     Doubtless  Christ,  as  a 


286  CHRIST. 

man,  grew  in  stature  and  knowledge  ;  with  perfect  humanity, 
he  always  confot-med  to  its  essential  conditions ;  nothing  out 
of  place,  but  everything  is  in  place  both  in  his  words  and 
conduct.  Christ's  intellect  came  in  contact  with  all  condi- 
tions of  men,  the  high  and  the  low,  the  weak  and  the  power- 
ful, the  learned  and  the  unlearned,  and  yet  not  in  the  slight- 
est degree  %vas  it  ever  injured  by  this  contact  so  intimate. 
ISTor  did  Christ  in  his  youth  enjoy  the  advantages  of  the 
schools ;  he  lived  in  Nazareth,  a  by-word  even  with  the  Jews 
for  its  dissoluteness  of  manners,' its  ignorance  and  wicked- 
ness ;  his  parents  were  poor,  himself  brought  up  to  the  trade 
of  a  carpenter.  We  have  no  evidence  that  he  had  any  ad- 
vantages whatever  for  learning;  his  occupation  precluded  him 
from  the  leisure  essential  for  success  in  acquiring  much 
knowledge.  Surrounded  by  influences  the  most  unfriendly, 
the  child  of  poverty,  toiling  from  day  to  day  to  obtain  sub- 
sistence for  his  body,  encouraged  by  no  persons  in  power,  he 
yet  suddenly  emerges  from  his  obscurity  and  draws  upon 
himself  the  eager  gaze  of  all  classes  in  society,  not  only  be- 
cause of  his  wisdom,  but  those  mighty  works  that  challenged 
the  severest  scrutiny,  while  they  carried  with  them  the 
clearest  evidence  of  his  Messiahship. 

Observe  how  Christ  unfolded  truth  to  his  disciples,  how 
wisely  he  conformed  his  instructions  to  their  situation,  while 
all  the  plots  of  his  enemies  were  unmasked  by  the  inimitable 
excellence  and  point  of  his  language  toward  them.  Could 
the  profoundest,  clearest,  strongest  intellect  the  world  has 
ever  seen  be  mistaken  as  to  whether  miracles  were  worked 
or  not? — whether  works  were  performed  accrediting  his 
mission  or  not  ?  Remember,  Christ  declared,  over  and  over 
again,  that  his  works  showed  him  from  God,  and  challenged 
the  most  embittered  of  his  foes  to  examine  them.  Remem- 
ber that,  however  we  may  view  Christ,  one  thing  is  certain, 
he  knew  what  he  was  about.  Jesus  did  know  whether  he 
worked  miracles  or  not.  He  was  no  enthusiast,  no  visionary 
mortal,  capable,  by  the  excess  of  his  imagination  or  the  undue 
development  of  any  other  faculty  of  the  mind,  of  being  de- 
ceived. His  perfect  self-possession  and  intuitive  sagacity,  that 


CHRIST.  287 

singular  discernment  that  never  for  an  instant  forsook  him, 
the  character  of  his  instructions,  his  answers  to  the  Scrihes 
and  Pharisees,  and  all  his  actions,  evinced  one  thing, — Christ 
knew  what  he  was  about ;  others  might  be  deceived,  but  he 
was  not;  othei's  might  attach  an  exaggerated  importance  to 
unessentials,  but  Christ  did  not.  The  knowledge  he  dis- 
played, his  lofty  sei-enity,  his  amber-like  clearness  of  intel- 
lect, that  saw  ever  absolute  truth  without  imperfection,  that 
robust  strength  of  thought  that  grasped  in  a  moment  the 
most  perplexing  subjects  and  unraveled  difficulties  that 
for  centuries  had  perplexed  the  wisest  thinkers,  all  testify  to 
one  self-evident  truth, —  Christ  kneio  lohat  he  was  about.  This 
is  especiall}'  evident  when  we  consider  that  there  is  not  one 
instance  on  record  of  his  ever  beino;  mistaken,  ever  being; 
outwitted  by  his  enemies.  They  tried  often  to  ensnare  him, 
but  he  uniformly  confounded  them.  Thus,  in  the  question 
of  the  tribute-money,  in  that  of  the  woman  who  had  married 
seven  husbands,  or  the  one  taken  in  adultery,  or  the  i  eply  to 
the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  who  would  have  him  tell  by  what 
authority  he  acted,  and  in  many  other  instances,  Christ  never 
spoke  unadvisedly,  or  in  any  way  placed  himself  in  a  false 
position. 

Have  we  not,  then,  the  most  conclusive  evidence  that 
Christ  kneia  what  he  was  about,  and  could  not  be  wanting  in 
intelligence  ?  The  next  question  to  be  considered  is.  Was 
Christ  honest?  was  he  true?  was  he  what  he  professed  himself 
to  be  ?  Here  notice  a  most  remarkable  fact:  very  few  indeed 
even  of  those  who  have  rejected  the  Bible  as  the  word  of 
God,  and  denied  the  reality  of  miracles,  have  ever  been  so 
presumptuous  as  to  assert  .that  Christ  was  dishonest.  The 
greatest  skeptics  have  recoiled  instinctively  from  such  an  idea, 
so  fearful  and  so  repulsive.  "We  can  safely  say  that  the 
worst  of  infidels  would  shudder  to  assert  that  Christ  was  an 
impostor.  Whatever  may  be  said  against  Christianity,  the 
last  and  the  most  unfounded  of  all  assertions  is  that  which 
impeaches  the  moral  character  of  Christ.  Remember  how 
monstrous  the  thought,  that  one  whose  instructions  were  so 
full  of  wisdom,  tenderness,  love,  and  compassion,  whose  life 


288  CHRIST. 

was  so  marked  by  self-denial  and  voluntary  suffering  for 
others'  good,  whose  whole  history,  from  the  cradle  to  the 
grave,  was  that  of  the  highest  illustration  of  innocence, 
should  be  capable  of  dishonesty ! 

Observe  Christ  as  he  revealed  himself  in  his  conduct  and 
instructions,  and  say  where  can  an  instance  be  found  of  the 
least  swerving  from  the  rule  of  the  most  absolute  rectitude. 
As  the  mind  thinks  of  those  varied  and  extraordinary  condi- 
tions of  his  life,  where  our  Saviour  came  in  contact  with  sin 
in  its  most  malignant  shape,  can  it  be  shown  that  his  spot- 
less raiment  of  righteousness  was  deiiled  by  the  least  stain  ? 
Observe  that  occasions  were  presented  of  severest  trial ;  and 
yet  did  all  this  trial  produce  any  other  effect  than  to  reveal 
with  a  brighter  luster  his  wonderful  virtue  ?  Follow  Christ 
from  the  commencement  of  his  ministry  of  three  years  to 
its  consummation  upon  the  cross,  and  say  whether  the  ex- 
quisite sensitiveness  of  his  nature  yielded  ever  so  little  before 
the  force  of  temptation? 

Kow,  one  thing  is  certain,  either  Christ  worked  the  mira- 
cles he  professed,  either  he  was  all  he  taught  of  himself,  or 
he  was  dishonest.  There  is  really  no  other  alternative.  We 
have  seen  his  amazing  sagacity  and  intelligence,  and  this 
fact  establishes  the  proposition, —  Christ  knew  what  he  ivas 
ohoiit;  if  so,  then  we  are  shut  up  to  the  alternative, — Christ 
was  what  he  professed  himself  to  be,  or  he  was  dishonest. 
We  hold  the  skeptic  to  this  stern,  this  irresistible  fact.  In 
our  other  chapters  we  give  proofs  from  many  sources  to  show 
the  Bible  fr(5m  God;  but  this  only  goes  to  show  that  Christ 
also  was  from  God;  and  if  so,  then  what  he  said  was  true, 
and  what  he  worked  confirms  his  words  as  perfectly  reliable 
and  deserving  of  confidence. 

In  the  remarkable  work  of  "  Ecce  Homo,"  where  the  au- 
thor contemplates  mostly  the  human  of  Christ,  it  will  be 
seen  that  he  has  portrayed  with  marked  ability  this  aspect 
of  our  Saviour.  Let  us  look  closely  to  the  humanity  of 
Christ  alone,  and  it  will  be  found  that,  considered  simply  as 
a  man,  the  sun  at  noonday  is  not  more  visible  in  the  heavens 
than  is  displayed  the  honesty  of  Christ  in  all  that  he  said  or 


CHRIST.  289 

did  ;  and  yet  that  honesty  in  a  human  relation  involves 
Christ's  honesty  in  a  divine  relation,  and  the  truth  he  spoke 
as  a  man  irresistibly  forces  us  to  confess  his  truthfulness  as 
the  Son  of  God.  No  person  can  confess  his  veracity  as  the 
Son  of  man,  without  crossing  that  line  that  tells  of  his  truth- 
fulness as  the  Son  of  God.  For  certain  purposes  it  may  be 
well  to  contemplate  Christ  in  simply  a  human  relation,  but 
the  mind,  as  it  gazes  at  the  fairest  picture  of  humanity  that 
ever  the  world  has  seen,  must,  if  true  to  itself,  pass  into  the 
awfully  mysterious  domain  of  his  divine  attributes.  Not  the 
prismatic  colors  of  the  sunbeam  are  so  blended  together  iis 
the  supernatural  and  the  human  in  Christ.  Not  a  drop  of 
water  so  holds  in  its  composition  the  elements  of  hydrogen 
and  oxygen  as  does  the  person  of  Jesus  the  twofold  excel- 
lence of  a  human  and  divine  nature.  All  this  must  be  ad- 
mitted if  we  confess  his  miracles;  and  his  miracles  must  be 
admitted  if  we  hold  to  his  honesty.  If  it  is  impossible  to 
conceive  of  Christ  as  imposed  upon,  equally  dijfficult  is  it  to 
imagine  him  to  deceive. 

Which  horn  of  the  dilemma  does  the  skeptic  take  ?  Does 
jhe  say  Christ  was  imposed  upon  ?  Then  he  must  admit  his 
destitution  of  intelligence,  his  incompetence,  his  extraordi- 
nary want  of  all  discernment  and  wisdom  ;  but,  worse  than  this, 
he  must  also  declare  that  the  apostles  were  deceived  as  to 
Christ's  miracles,  and  that  his  enemies  who  confessed  them 
true  while  they  attributed  them  to  Beelzebub,  and  also  the 
Christians  of  the  first  century,  were  deluded,  and  suffered 
only  in  the  cause  of  deception.  Take  the  other  horn  of  the 
dilemma;  Was  Christ  an  impostor?  Did  he  act  untruthfully 
or  deceitfully?  But  this  supposition,  that  should  blister  the 
tongue  of  any  mortal  who  would  make  it,  is  at  war  with  the 
first  dictate  of  conscience,  and  equally  at  war  with  every 
principle  of  correct  reasoning  or  good  sensibility. 

That  man  may  well  tremble  who  throws  upon  the  charac- 
ter of  Christ  the  imputation  of  dishonesty.  No,  not  the 
worst  infidels  will  do  this.  They  will  shut  their  eyes  to 
the  proofs  of  Christ's  divine  mission,  while  they  praise  his 
virtues;  they  will  extol  his  goodness,  his  love,  his  mercy,  his 

"  19 


290  CHRIST. 

tender  sympathy  with  the  suffering,  his  wisdom,  his  moral 
beauty,  and  yet  they  will  turn  round  and  deny  the  super- 
natural of  his  character,  and  refuse  to  credit  his  miracles. 
They  will  call  his  incarnation  a  fiction,  and  his  resurrection 
a  delusion.  Monstrous  inconsistency !  Admit  a  God,  and 
deny  that  he  cannot  become  incarnated  in  his  Son  !  Admit 
sin,  and  yet  refuse  to  see  its  only  remedy !  Admit  Christ's 
virtue,  and  deny  his  works !  Admit  that  Jesus  was  all  sym- 
pathy, love,  sincerity,  and  truth,  and  yet  refuse  to  see  or 
hear  what  he  says  of  himself!  Admit  everything  human, 
and  yet  impeach  that  humanity  really  of  deception !  All 
this  the  skeptic  must  do  unless  he  is  willing  to  take  the  New 
Testament  and  interpret  it  simply  according  to  the  plain 
meaning  of  the  language. 

The  question  is.  Did  Christ  do  what  he  said  he  would  do? 
Was  he  what  he  professed  to  be  ?  Did  Christ  work  miracles 
as  conclusive  evidence,  with  the  end  for  which  he  came,  and 
the  nature  of  his  instructions,  that  he  came  from  God  and 
was  heaven-descended?  If  he  was  thus,  then  he  was  honest; 
if  not,  then  could  he  be  honest? 

Let  us,  then,  contemplate  Christ  in  what  he  said  of  himself 
and  that  which  he  professed  to  do.  Three  things  we  have 
attempted  to  show:  First,  Christ  was  no  fiction;  secondly, 
not  deceived;  thirdly,  no  deceiver.  Let  us  now  consider  what 
Christ  said  of  himself  and  what  was  said  of  him  by  the 
apostles.  The  argument  is  cumulative.  If  inspired  men 
confirm  all  that  Christ  declared  himself  to  be,  and  testify  to 
the  reality  of  his  works,  then  the  evidence  comes  with  aug- 
mented force  to  show  that  the  character  of  Christ  involved 
his  works,  and  his  works  his  character;  his  veracity  proves  his 
miracles,  and  his  miracles  his  veracity;  his  disciples  show  the 
truthfulness  of  their  Master,  and  that  truthfulness  proves  the 
reality  of  their  discipleship.  In  our  other  chapters  the  evi- 
dence of  prophecy  and  miracles  is  given,  with  many  other 
proofs.  All  that  now  is  needed,  is  to  quote  the  words  of 
Jesus  himself  and  the  apostles  of  Jesus,  showing  clearly  that 
unless  we  impeach  Christ's  character  we  must  admit  his 
works  and  the  reality  of  his  divine  mission.     When  John 


CHRIST.  291 

the  Baptist  was  thrown  into  prison,  he  sent  messengers  to 
ask  directly  of  Clirist  whether  he  was  the  Messiah  or  not. 
Jesus  answered,  "Go  and  show  John  again  those  things 
which  ye  do  hear  and  see:  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and 
the  lame  walk:  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf  hear: 
the  dead  are  raised  up,  and  the  poor  have  the  gospel  preached 
to  them ;  and  blessed  is  he  whosoever  shall  not  be  oifended 
in  me."  Two  things  here  are  directly  asserted:  miraculous 
power,  and  to  the  jpoor  proclamation  of  good  tidings.  Ob- 
serve that  miracles  are  never  divorced  from  their  end ;  they 
are  always  worked  for  a  worthy  object.  The  four  evangel- 
ists represent  Christ  as  working  miracles ;  they  are  inter- 
woven in  the  whole  web  of  his  ministry.  Christ  referred  to 
his  mighty  works  as  aggravating  the  guilt  immeasurably  of 
the  cities  that  rejected  him.  He  speaks  thus  of  liis  works  : 
"  The  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bear  wit- 
ness of  me."  Now,  Christ  never  had  a  low  idea  of  his  mira- 
cles. In  the  circumstances  of  his  advent,  life,  and  mission, 
they  were  of  incalculable  value.  The  method  of  proof  he 
proposed  was  of  the  most  direct  and  positive  character. 
Christ  plainly  pointed  to  his  works.  These  works,  says 
Christ,  are  my  credentials,  the  royal  seal  of  God  himself; 
and,  thus  addressing  those  who  heard  him  and  saw  his  mira- 
cles, he  challenged  them  to  show  those  miracles  false,  or  to 
prove  that  they  Avere  worked  by  any  other  than  God's  own 
Son.  Christ  challenged  the  Jews  in  any  respect  to  show 
him  a  sinner,  or  in  the  least  thing  to  prove  him  recreant  to 
his  duty  to  man  or  God.  They  could  not  do  it;  his  enemies 
were  dumb  before  him, — absolutely  confounded  by  the 
demonstrations  he  gave  of  his  authority  as  the  true  prophet 
of  God  and  his  own  well-beloved  Son,  Miracles  b}"  Christ 
had  always  an  evidential  character,  simply  worked  as  an  un- 
ansA'erable  argument  to  show  that  he  was  just  what  he  pro- 
fessed himself  to  be.  Christ  did  not  say  that  his  life  or  his 
teachings  alone  proved  him  from  God;  but,  taken  in  connec- 
tion with  his  miracles,  none  could  refuse  to  reject  him  with- 
out the  deepest  guilt  and  exposure  to  the  severest  punishment 
of  God.     Think  for  a  moment  how  eagerly  the  enemies  of 


292  CHRIST. 

our  Saviour  would  have  seized  upon  one  false  miracle  and 
made  mountains  out  of  a  single  mistake,  if  Christ  gave  them 
really  this  opportunity.  But  Christ  did  not  give  his  crafty 
foes  an  inch  of  land  to  stand  upon, — he  left  them  all  sus- 
pended in  the  air  by  the  cord  of  their  own  malice.  Thus, 
observe,  no  charge  was  brought  against  Christ  before  Pilate 
of  working  false  miracles.  Christ  was  fully  in  the  power  of 
his  enemies;  but  they  could  not  point  to  a  single  instance  of 
deception  on  his  part,  either  in  his  actions  or  his  words. 
They  cloaked  their  hatred  indeed  under  the  charge  of  blas- 
phemy, and  yet  they  perversely  shut  their  eyes  to  the  only 
thing  that  was  able  to  prove  it,  and  that  was  to  show  that 
Christ  worked  no  miracles.  Observe  the  ocular  and  tactual 
demonstration  of  his  resurrection  given  to  Thomas.  Christ 
did  not  repel  him,  but  invited  him  to  the  fullest  proof  of  his 
miraculous  victory  over  the  grave.  What  more  appropriate 
exclamation  after  such  a  proof  than  those  words  of  amaze- 
ment that  broke  from  his  lips,  "My  Lord  and  my  God  !" 

Read  over  the  declarations  of  the  evangelists  and  of  Paul 
respecting  Christ's  miracles,  and  can  anything  be  more  plain 
than  that  Christ  professed  to  raise  the  dead,  and  did  thus 
actually  do  ?  To  add  tenfold  weight  to  his  proof  of  oneness 
with  God,  and  his  divine  commission  as  the  Saviour  of  the 
world,  he  confidently  predicts  his  own  death,  and  lays  down 
his  life  in  confirmation  of  this  truth.  Thus  there  is  the 
highest  possible  evidence  given  that  he  was  what  he  professed 
himself  to  be,  in  that  he  made  his  death  and  resurrection 
credentials  that  he  was  sent  from  God.  Observe  especially 
how  Christ  spoke  of  those  who  would  not  believe  upon  him. 
Did  Christ  work  no  miracles,  he  could  not  thus  speak  Avithout 
bringing  into  absolute  contempt  his  mission,  even  in  the 
minds  of  his  disciples.  "Who  ever  made  assertions  of  such 
startling  importance,  or  assumed  a  position  of  such  amazing 
significance  ?  What  words  of  awful  grandeur  fell  from  his 
lips,  all  directly  assuming  equality  with  God,  and  leaving 
the  impression  upon  the  mind  that  while  in  one  sense  he  was 
man,  in  another  sense  he  was  infinitely  above  man,  and  dis- 
tinct from  him!     It  is  self-evident  that  assumptions  of  such 


CHRIST.  293 

startling  siguificauce  must  rest  upon  the  solid  basis  of  mira- 
cles, or  they  would  be  indignantly  repelled  by  even  his  sin- 
cerest  friends. 

Christ  had  to  do  with  three  classes  of  persons — open  ene- 
mies, curious  spectators,  weak  but  true  disciples.  Certainly 
his  bitter  foes,  and  his  prying  and  indifferent  spectators, 
would  not  for  a  moment  regard  him,  or  be  silenced  by  him, 
unless  he  did  work  miracles;  and  his  disciples  without  them 
could  not  be  persuaded  to  follow  him.  Now,  the  foes  of 
Christ  could  do  nothing  against  him  except  under  false  pre- 
tenses, while  the  curious  confessed  his  mighty  works,  while 
they  would  not  deny  themselves  for  him,  and  his  disciples 
had  their  faith  every  day  confirmed,  until  it  became  a  con- 
viction of  the  mind  so  strong  as  to  lead  them  to  forsake  all 
worldly  good  to  secure  the  approbation  of  their  Master,  en- 
durino;  all  evils  for  that  cause  that  enlisted  the  hio-hest  love 
of  their  hearts. 

Observe  also  the  oneness  of  all  Christ's  purposes  for  the 
benefit  of  the  world.  Jesus  was  singularly  elevated  above  the 
age  in  which  he  lived.  With  Jewish  bigotry  he  had  no 
sympathy ;  he  favored  neither  the  exclusiveness  of  Judaism 
nor  the  vices  of  Gentileism.  There  w^as  a  unity  in  all  his 
conduct,  a  oneness  of  aim  that  never  deviated  from  the  most 
perfect  rectitude.  If  Christ  had  not  been  what  he  professed 
himself  to  be,  he  could  not  uniformly  have  persevered  in  the 
course  he  did.  When  we  read  the  historians  of  Christ,  we 
find  all  the  four  evangelists  agreeing  in  recording,  without 
collusion,  the  everyday  acts  of  his  life,  and  his  instructions 
to  his  disciples.  They  all  agree  in  confirming  the  miracles 
he  worked,  and  reveal  Christ  as^ always  having  the  same  great 
end  in  view,  even  the  salvation  of  the  world.  Not  a  single 
valid  discrepancy  can  be  found ;  not  one  conflicting  statement. 
Look  to  the  grandeur  of  the  end  Christ  ever  had  in  his  mind. 
How  infinitely  insignificant  the  temporal  glory  of  a  nation 
to  the  salvation  of  the  world !  How  mean  the  benefit  of  an 
earthly  state  in  comparison  to  the  salvation  of  the  soul !  In 
contrast,  how  contracted  all  the  glory  of  the  earth  ! 

It  is  in  the  nobleness  of  all  Christ's  instructions  and  life 


294  CHRIST. 

that  we  see  also  the  impossibility  of  deception.  From  the 
manger  to  the  cross,  all  had  an  intimate  relation  to  this  great 
end.  As  the  great  author  of  redemption,  Christ  never  for  a 
moment  permitted  himself  to  lose  sight  of  it.  Appearing 
in  an  age  singularly  bigoted,  among  a  people  attached  to 
idolatry,  to  the  Mosaic  ritual  and  the  ceremonial  law,  he  yet 
borrowed  in  his  life  and  instructions  not  one  trait  of  the  age 
he  lived  in,  or  had  in  himself  a  single  element  that  was  in 
unison  with  the  popular  spirit.  Equally  opposed  was  Christ 
to  the  philosophy  and  practices  of  the  Gentile  world.  His 
kingdom  was  not  of  this  earth.  He  neither  asked  its  favors 
nor  feared  its  frowns.  He  neither  succumbed  to  the  prejudices 
nor  trembled  beneath  the  power  of  the  might}' ;  was  neither 
seduced  by  the  riches  nor  dazzled  by  the  honors  of  the  world. 
Solitary,  in  his  own  glory  did  he  reveal  himself,  in  his  divin- 
ity the  most  unapproachable,  and  in  his  humanity  the  most 
accessible.  Possessing  in  himself  the  most  diverse  qualities, 
he  combined  the  most  opposite  virtues  ;  meek  and  gentle 
beyond  conception,  yet  calm,  resolute,  and  energetic;  weep- 
ing at  the  grave  of  Lazarus,  and  rebuking  the  pride  of  the 
Pharisees  in  language  never  to  be  surpassed  in  severity ; 
familiar  to  little  children,  and  yet  making  the  Jewish  San- 
hedrim amazed  before  the  awfulness  of  his  reserve.  To  him 
the  most  helpless,  the  most  ignorant  and  destitute  of  this 
world's  goods,  could  approach  without  fear ;  and  yet  the  ele- 
ments of  nature  were  all  subservient  to  his  word.  The 
wisdom  of  Christ  clearly  shows  him  from  God.  One  un- 
guarded expression  of  veneration  to  his  mother  would  have 
laid  deep  in  human  nature  a  valid  foundation  for  an  idolatry 
the  most  insidious  and  powerful, — an  idolatry  that  supports 
the  whole  system  of  Eomanism,  and  which  needed  but  a 
word  to  make  it  as  universal  as  the  Bible  itself.  But  no 
language  can  portray  the  inimitable  caution  of  Christ :  with 
a  divine  foresight,  he  looked  through  all  coming  ages,  and 
provided  an  antidote  for  every  spiritual  disease  of  man. 


CHAPTER    III. 

CHRIST    AS    MORALIST,  LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND    KING. 

We  will  consider  Clirist  in  those  most  extraordinary  feat- 
ures that  make  him,  in  distinction  from  all  human  beings, 
the  moralist,  legislator,  redeemer,  and  king  of  mankind,  and 
which  prove  him,  in  connection  with  miracles  and  prophecy, 
to  be  not  only  the  Son  of  man,  but  the  Son  of  man  in  a  sense 
essentially  dift'erent  and  infinitely  superior  to  that  which  can 
be  predicated  of  any  of  Adam's  posterity. 

The  chapters  on  miracles  and  prophecj-,  with  that  upon 
the  success  of  Christianity  in  the  first  century,  enter  in  as 
conclusive  proof  of  that  which  Christ  says  of  himself,  and 
should  be  read  not  only  as  connecting  links  of  the  great 
chain  of  evidence  showing  the  Bible  from  God,  but  as  re- 
vealing with  the  utmost  clearness  that  Christ  is  the  Alpha 
and  Omega  of  all  revelation,  the  First  and  Last  of  all  that 
which  constitutes  redemption  for  man. 

Never  was  there  an  age  of  the  world  where  morality  was 
based  upon  principles  more  fundamentally  wrong  than  that 
ao'e  in  which  Christ  came.  The  antediluvian  ag-e  mie-ht  in 
the  grossness  of  sin  be  worse,  but  certainly  the  age  that  wit- 
nessed the  advent  of  Christ  to  this  world  excelled  in  every- 
thing hj'pocritical  and  false.  The  Roman  conquests  had  in- 
troduced outward  unity  in  the  political  world,  and  established 
a  centralized  power  that  broke  down  the  separating  walls 
that  in  past  ages  had  divided  one  nation  from  another ;  but 
those  conquests  were  based  upon  force  :  fear  in  the  conquered 
nations  brought  about  an  external  obedience,  while  at  heart 
there  was  no  sympathy  or  real  union.  So  far  as  the  Roman 
world  was  concerned,  all  morality  centered  in  the  state  and 

(295) 


296  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

all  virtue  was  summed  up  in  obedience  to  C?esar.  Political 
idolatry  liad  taken  the  place  of  the  homage  paid  in  former 
ages  to  the  gods,  and  heathenism  itself  had  changed  its  old 
garb  for  a  more  liberal  superstition,  which  included  in  the 
divinities  adored,  successful  generals  and  emperors.  But 
things,  if  possible,  were  worse  in  Judea;  for  there  all  the  ex- 
clusiveness  of  Judaism  existed,  while  there  was  a  total  de- 
parture from  the  heroic  virtues  of  the  age  of  Joshua  or  David, 
or  even  the  later  times  of  the  Maccabees.  The  fire  of  pure 
devotion  had  almost  gone  out  upon  the  sacrificial  altar,  and 
but  a  few  feeble  sparks  were  seen  in  those  worshipers  who 
impatiently  looked  for  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.  So  far 
as  morality  was  concerned,  Judea  exhibited  the  spectacle  of 
a  whitewashed  sepulcher,  an  empty  shell,  with  all  that  once 
constituted  the  value  of  the  nut  extracted.  Society  was  divided 
into  two  great  classes — gross  sinners  and  plausible  moralists. 
The  former  class  knew  themselves  to  be  sinners,  but  cared 
little  about  leaving  off  sinning,  while  the  latter  class  felt  them- 
selves to  be  righteous,  Avhile  practically  they  were  profoundly 
ignorant  of  the  first  principles  of  all  virtue,  or  at  heart  hostile 
to  them.  The  open  sinners  and  the  legalists  all  agreed  in  one 
thing,  that  God  in  some  way  should  be  worshiped,  and  all 
were  pleased  with  that  kind  of  worship  which  dispensed  with 
the  self-sacrificing  homage  of  the  eoul,  Avhile  they  submitted 
to  the  outward  form  of  religion.  How  radically  corrupt  was 
that  state  of  society  when  one  class  practiced  that  which 
they  would  not  learn,  and  the  other  taught  that  which  they 
would  not  practice !  where  conscience  was  alike  defiled 
and  unfaithful,  and  the  only  religion  that  prevailed  was  a 
painted  caricature  of  the  true  !  What  was  Judea,  morally 
considered,  but  a  monstrous  and  grotesque  exhibition  of 
whatever  was  bigoted,  supercilious,  and  formal  ?  The 
legalists  were  looked  upon  by  the  multitude  as  very 
pious.  There  was  the  exact  washing  of  cups  and  platters, 
the  precise  payment  of  mint  and  anise,  the  most  punctual 
observance  of  fast-days  and  feast-days  ;  there  were  religious 
processions  without  number,  holy  banners,  sacred  badges, 
ecclesiastical   intonations,  fragrant  incense,   long  faces,  and 


•  LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND  KING.  297 

sackcloth  garments.  Never,  probably,  did  the  temple  or  the 
streets  witness  prayers  so  long,  or  manners  more  exact,  or 
religion  more  vociferous. 

The  Scribes  and  Pharisees  were  never  more  pleased  than 
when  they  heard  the  respectful  salutation  of  Rabbi  !  Rabbi! 
And  these  were  the  authorized  teachers  of  the  people.  As 
the  author  of  "Ecce  Homo"  has  well  said,  "  The  legalist  be- 
lieves that  the  old  method  by  which  their  ancestors  had 
arrived  at  a  knowledge  of  the  requirements  of  duty,  namely, 
divine  inspiration,  was  no  longer  available,  and  that  nothing 
more  remained  but  carefully  to  collect  the  results  at  which 
their  ancestors  had  arrived  by  this  method,  to  adopt  their 
results  as  rules,  and  to  observe  them  punctiliously.  De- 
voutly believing  that  in  the  most  trifling  matter,  where 
action  was  involved,  there  was  a  right  course  and  a  wrong- 
one,  and  at  the  same  time  entirely  deserted  by  the  instinct 
or  inspiration  which  distinguishes  the  one  from  the  other, 
they  invented  the  most  frivolous  casuistry  that  has  ever  been 
known ;  they  overburdened  men's  memories  and  perplexed 
their  lives  with  an  endless  multitude  of  rules,  which  some- 
times were  simply  trivial ;  e.g.  an  egg  laid  on  a  festival 
day  may  be  eaten,  according  to  the  school  of  Shammai ;  but 
the  school  of  Hillel  says  it  must  not  be  eaten  ;  and  at  other 
times  were  immoral,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Corban,  which 
Christ  selected  for  censure."  "But  it  is  evident  that  Christ 
was  not  better  pleased  with  their  good  deeds  than  with  their 
bad  ones.  Their  good  deeds  had  the  nature  of  imposture; 
that  is,  they  did  not  proceed  from  the  motives  from  which 
such  deeds  naturally  spring,  and  from  which  the  public  sup- 
posed them  to  spring.  When  these  men  tithed  their  property 
for  the  service  of  religion,  did  they  do  so  from  the  ardent 
feelings  which  had  suggested  the  oblations  of  David  in  old 
times?  No  doubt  the  people  thought  so;  but  in  truth  they 
paid  tithes  from  a  motive  which  might  just  as  well  have 
prompted  them  to  take  tithes — respect  for  a  traditional  rule. 
When  they  searched  and  sifted  the  Scriptures,  fancying,  as 
Christ  said,  that  in  them  they  had  eternal  life,  did  they  do  so 
because  they  felt  deeply  the  wisdom  of  the  old  prophets  and 


298  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

legislators?  The  people  no  doubt  thought  that  these  dili- 
gent students  were  possessed  with  the  spirit  of  what  they 
read  ;  but  the  truth  was  that  they  only  pored  over  the  ancient 
scrolls  because  they  understood  that  it  was  proper  to  read 
them  ;  therefore  the  more  they  read  the  less  they  understood. 
And  they  paid  the  same  reverence  to  the  languid  futilities  of 
some  purblind  commentator  as  to  the  inspirations  of  Isaiah. 
When  they  lauded  the  ancient  prophets,  and  built  their 
sepulchers,  was  it  because  thej^  were  congenial  spirits,  formed 
in  their  school,  and  bent  upon  following  in  their  steps?  The 
people  thought  so;  but  Christ  pronounced,  with  memorable 
point  and  truth,  what  is  true  of  many  other  worshipers  of 
antiquity  besides  the  Pharisees,  that  they  were  the  legitimate 
representatives  of  those  who  kilted  the  jjvophets,  and  that  they 
betrayed  this  by  the  very  worship  which  they  paid  to  their 
memory." 

Here,  then,  were  two  classes  Christ  had  to  deal  with:  the 
people,  ignorant,  deluded,  and  vicious;  the  teachers,  proud, 
hypocritical,  and  false,  having  just  enough  of  the  appearance 
of  virtue  to  escape  the  consequences  of  vice,  but  not  enough 
to  deliver  from  its  secret  power.  In  both  classes  morality 
was  misunderstood  in  its  great  principles,  and  therefore  all 
duty  was  misdirected  or  unperformed.  But  the  mischief  was 
incalculably  greater  upon  the  side  of  duty,  submitted  to  only 
in  its  form,  than  where  neither  its  form  nor  spirit  was  carried 
out;  for  the  people  were  in  a  condition  where  they  might  be 
reached,  while  the  Pharisees  were  in  a  state  where  all  reason 
or  proof  was  useless.  The  mists  that  hung  over  the  ignorant 
multitude,  openly  sinning  and  experiencing  the  penalties  of 
a  cost  confessed  to  be  alike  unclean  and  undone,  might  be 
cleared  away  by  the  divine  teachings  of  that  Saviour  who 
healed  men  in  their  bodies  as  in  their  souls ;  but  that  delusion 
that  enchained  the  privileged  order  had  other  and  more 
fatal  elements  of  evil  than  those  which  characterized  the 
people.  Pride,  with  its  triple  coat  of  mail,  bigotry,  ever 
jealous  of  its  prerogatives,  and  a  fanatical  regard  for  those 
forms  that  brought  consideration  and  wealth,  ever  stood  in 
the    way;    consequently,  of  all    classes    the    legalists  were 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KINO.  299 

most  hostile  to  Christ;  and  the  reason  lay  in  the  fact  that 
Christ  not  only  proved  their  morality  baseless,  but  took 
away  the  cloak  of  hypocrisy  by  which  they  deceived  the 
people.  Now,  in  all  duty,  Christ  enforced,  as  never  before, 
the  value  of  a  right  state  of  heart.  All  his  instructions  were 
directed  to  the  great  point  of  personal  holiness.  There  must 
be  some  principle  at  the  root  of  all  obedience,  which  makes 
all  action  right,  and  without  which  no  word  or  deed  has  in  it 
that  which  could  commend  itself  to  God.  What  especially  was 
the  idea  of  this  principle  and  its  sphere  of  activity?  It  was 
the  affections  under  the  law  of  right — not  a  theory  of  right, 
but  an  impulse  of  right,  a  condition  where  all  the  sensibili- 
ties are  awakened,  and  all  directed  in  the  pure  channel  of 
holy  love.  The  first  principle  of  morality  taught  by  Christ 
was,  that  no  duty  toward  God  or  man  could  be  rightly  per- 
formed without  the  heart.  In  other  words,  Christ  dwelt  upon 
the  spirit  of  obedience  rather  than  form — its  internal  devel- 
opment rather  than  its  external.  But  the  essence  of  all  duty 
consisted  in  holy  love — its  impelling  principle  must  be  this, 
because  this  alone  is  the  only  effectual  antidote  against 
temptation  and  sin ;  but  the  right  action  of  the  sensibilities 
was  the  last  thing  thought  of  by  the  legalists,  and  the  least 
understood  by  all  classes.  Religion  had  degenerated  into 
mere  form,  and  all  worship  had  ceased  to  have  that  principle 
that  alone  could  make  it  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God,  or 
tliat  spirit  without  which  he  could  not  be  approached.  Thus 
all  duty  had  become  simply  an  affair  of  outward  action,  leav- 
ing the  source  itself  of  morality  untouched. 

Judaism  differed  in  that' age  from  paganism  onlj^  in  that  it 
was  more  intellectually  right.  It  had  lost  that  element  of 
obedience  that  inspired  Abraham,  and  David,  and  Isaiah, 
and  simply  became  an  affiair  of  punctilious  observance,  an 
empty  routine  of  tiresome  ceremonies.  But  Christ  not  only 
pre-eminently  taught  the  right  source  of  all  morality,  but  also 
its  right  method.  This  method  was  singularly  comprehensive 
and  original.  It  was  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  N'ew  Dispen- 
sation which  he  introduced  into  the  world.  The  nature  of 
morality  in  Judaism  was  exclusive.     It  had  its  animus  in  the 


300  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

stereotyped  forms  of  a  Dispensation  that  was  to  be  super- 
seded by  a  better.  Consequently,  Christ  taught  that  our 
neighbor  was  not  the  Jew  alone,  but  the  Gentile,  and  that 
mercy  and  kindness  to  all  men  were  as  imperative  as  to 
the  children  of  Abraham.  Both  Jews  and  Gentiles  had  no 
true  idea  of  morality  toward  enemies  or  aliens.  How  to  act 
under  injuries  was  the  most  perplexing  of  all  problems  to 
solve.  But  Christ  enforced  a  line  of  conduct  under  injury 
absolutely  original,  if  we  look  to  the  leading  authorities 
among  both  Jews  and  Gentiles.  Thus,  among  the  Romans, 
forgiveness  toward  enemies,  the  suppressing  of  a  revenge- 
ful spirit  toward  conquered  foes,  hardly  entered  at  all  into  the 
idea  of  morality.  This  was  looked  upon  rather  as  a  vice  than 
a  virtue,  or,  if  a  virtue,  something  beyond  human  attainment. 
Among  the  Jews,  if  positive  enmity  did  not  exist  toward 
strangers  or  Gentiles,  positive  indifference  did,  and  the  prin- 
ciple of  forgiveness  as  enforced  by  Christ  toward  all  man- 
kind was  absolutely  unknown.  This,  in  practice,  was  a 
version  of  the  moral  law  neither  felt  nor  understood.  But 
morality,  as  inculcated  by  Christ,  not  only  broke  down  the 
separating  wall  between  Judaism  and  Gentileism,  and  made 
all  mankind  children  of  one  common  Father,  but,  in  relation 
to  God,  the  soul,  and  a  future  state,  principles  were  taught 
far  in  advance  of  anything  inculcated  in  the  Old  Testament. 
Christ  came  not  only  to  establish  the  law  and  the  prophets, 
but  to  give  something  vastly  superior.  Thus  the  Fatherhood 
of  God  was  brought  out  with  wonderful  distinctness,  and  also 
his  personal  interest  in  every  son  and  daughter  of  Adam ; 
not  only  God  under  the  aspect  of  reconciliation,  but  God 
under  the  aspect  of  Providence.  So,  also,  of  the  soul.  How 
vivid  the  light  that  is  flashed  upon  it  by  the  instructions  of 
Christ !  How  prominently  is  it  brought  out  in  its  value  and 
amazing  interests  !  Thus  Christ  places  the  seal  of  royalty 
upon  every  soul,  be  the  outward  condition  ever  so  poor,  ob- 
scure, and  afflicted  :  he  not  only  asserts  the  fact,  next  to  that 
of  God's  existence,  of  the  utmost  importance  for  man  to  know 
and  feel,  but  he  throws  around  this  fact  circumstances  of 
worth  that  never  before   entered  the  mind  of  any  person. 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  301 

So,  also,  of  a  future  state.  Here  we  see  how  great  the  value 
of  that  kind  of  morality  taught  by  Christ:  happiness  or 
misery  in  the  future,  the  resurrection  to  life  or  condemna- 
tion, all  have  an  intimate  bearing  upon  the  character  of  our 
lives  and  the  actual  condition  of  the  heart  of  every  person. 
The  great  thing  demanded  for  heaven  was  the  possession  of 
some  principle  that  should  be  of  universal  application,  and 
\Qt  so  simple,  so  true,  so  elemental  in  its  nature  as  to  make 
it  suitable  for  every  condition  of  mankind,  and  perfectly 
adapted  to  the  object  of  his  mission  to  save  the  soul.  What 
was  that  principle,  lying  at  the  root  of  all  true  morality,  and 
which,  as  an  indispensable  step,  secured  ultimately  a  right 
state  of  heart?  One  word  is  enough  to  express  it:  faith,  or 
confidence.  Christ  rested  everything  upon  that  simple  test, 
which  alone  was  possible  or  practicable  for  all  mankind. 
How  was  this  test  enforced  ?  Simply  by  saying,  If  you  have 
confidence  in  me,  you  will  regard  my  possession  worthy  of  all 
necessary  sacrifice.  You  will  take  up  your  cross  for  me. 
Thus,  morality  was  based  upon  the  double  foundation  of 
right  faith  and  right  love,  faith  that  should  bring  this  love, 
love  that  should  bring  this  faith ;  both  in  their  very  nature 
must  lie  not  upon  the  surface  of  humanity,  but  at  the  center, 
the  heart,  and  both  must  exist  wherever  there  was  true 
obedience.  Now,  the  diiference  between  the  legalists  and 
Christ  was  this  :  legalists  insisted  upon  forms  and  rules  to 
bring  about  right  morality ;  Christ,  upon  faith  and  love. 
The  one  was  satisfied  with  the  shell  of  religion,  the  other 
only  with  the  meat  of  it.  , 

Here  observe  the  reason  why  the  legalists  were  so  severely 
censured  by  Christ,  and  so  openly  and  frequently  rebuked  in 
the  sternest  language.  Not  because  they  were  worse  than  all 
other  classes, — this  does  not  follow  necessarily, — but  because 
they  were  vastly  more  dangerous.  "With  pagans,  publicans, 
and  open  sinners,  with  the  confessedly  immoral  and  disso- 
lute, with  all  that  class  excommunicated  from  the  select  order 
of  pietists  or  consecrated  religionists,  and  especially  such  as 
came  under  the  ban  of  civil  law  and  suffered  the  penalties 
of  the  outraged  sentiments  of  society,  there  was  an  access 


302  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

by  Christ  immensely  more  easy,  and.  they  could  be  approached 
far  more  successfully.  But  between  the  legalists  and  Christ 
an  irreconcilable  hostility,  and  a  barrier  immeasurably  more 
difhcult,  existed.  The  legalists  had  borrowed  enough  of  the 
garb  of  true  religion  to  make  it  plausible  with  the  mul- 
titude, but^were  utterly  destitute  of  its  spirit;  they  assumed 
to  be  the  teachers  of  morality,  while  they  were  the  slaves  of 
conventional  rules,  forms,  and  ceremonies :  moreover,  they  ex- 
isted as  the  strongest  defenders  of  an  exclusive  Judaism. 
But  the  nature  of  Christ's  mission  had  superseded  this,  and 
the  end  of  his  advent  to  this  w^orld  was  to  do  away  with  all 
the  distinctions  of  Jew  and  Gentile  and  upon  the  wants  of  a 
common  humanity  introduce  a  religion  that  should  be  essen- 
tially universal.  Consequently,  before  Christ  could  proceed 
one  step  toward  establishing  Christianity,  he  must  destroy 
the  whole  system  of  legalism  in  the  estimation  of  the  people, 
aud  bring  into  deserved  contempt  the  hypocritical  teachers 
of  it. 

A  new  era  had  dawned  upon  the  world,  but  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  had  shut  their  eyes  to  the  miracles  of  our 
Saviour,  or  had  willfully  perverted  them  into  the  workings  of 
Beelzebub,  and,  wdiile  they  borrowed  all  that  was  burdensome 
and  formal  in  the  religion  of  the  prophets,  they  were  utterly 
destitute  of  their  spirit.  They  had  simply  floated  like  chips 
upon  the  sea  of  humanity,  and  like  chips  they  had  been 
thrown  upon  the  beach,  useless  for  all  purposes  conducive  to 
human  welfare.  Contenting  themselves  with  being  mere 
surface-teachers,  they  grew  worse  and  worse,  until  they  had 
arrived  at  just  that  point  where  in  honest  morality  they  were 
worse  than  the  people,  while  in  pretension  they  assumed  to 
be  immeasurably  better.  Christ  could  not  tolerate  them 
without  sacrificing  that  cause  for  which  he  was  willing  to 
suffer  and  to  die. 

Consider  Christ  as  a  legislator.  Moses  was  the  legislator 
of  a  nation,  Christ  of  the  world.  The  genius  of  the  one  was 
exclusive,  that  of  the  other  universal.  Moses'  legislation  was 
restricted  to  the  ceremonial  law  and  the  ten  commandments, 
Christ's  legislation  embodied  the  spirit  of  all  right  law,  while 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  303 

he  did  away  with  all  burdensome  forms  and  all  ceremonies 
that  could  not  assume  a  world-wide  adaptation.  Of  outward 
observances  Christ  restricted  himself  to  three — open  profes- 
sion with  his  visible  church,  baptism,  and  the  sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  Supper ;  but,  strictly  speaking,  the  last  two  were 
only  enjoined,  for  they  included  the  iirst.  N^ow,  the  legislation 
of  Christ  diiiered  essentially  from  that  of  Moses  in  that  it  not 
only  had  a  world-wide  adaptation,  but  it  had  a  vastly  more 
positive  character.  Its  spirit  was  essentially  aggressive  and 
comprehensive.  The  morality  of  the  former  consisted  more 
in  not  doing  evil —  Thou  shall  7iot,  was  the  animus  of  it, — while 
the  morality  of  Christ  consisted  in  doing  good,  and  its  watch- 
word was,  Thou  shall. 

For  motives  Moses  relied  more  on  temporal  rewards  and 
punishments,  but  Christ  on  eternal.  The  one  appealed  to 
the  present,  the  other  to  the  future.  The  legislation  of 
Moses  was  adapted  to  a  specific  end,  that  of  Christ  to  a 
general  end.  Thus,  while  the  legislation  of  Moses  may  be 
compared  to  a  river  flowing  on  in  a  prescribed  channel, 
that  of  Christ  could  only  be  likened  to  the  ocean  washing 
great  continents  and  fit  for  the  commerce  of  the  world. 
ISTotice  the  address  of  Christ  to  the  Samaritan  woman  at  the 
well  of  water :  "  But  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is,  when  the 
true  worshipers  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in 
truth ;  for  the  Father  seeketh  such  to  worship  him.  God  is 
a  Spirit,  and  they  that  worship  him  must  worship  him  in 
spirit  and  in  truth." 

Now  the  legislation  of  Christ  was  exactly  of  that  charac- 
ter that  made  him  a  law  to  all  his  true  disciples.  The  prin- 
ciple simply  consisted  in  holding  up  an  idea  of  excellence  in 
his  own  person  and  instructions  so  perfect  that  nothing  could 
be  added  to  it,  and  nothing,  without  loss,  taken  from  it. 
This  ideal,  if  not  attainable  in  this  world,  was  ever  to  be 
reached  after,  and  in  itself  was  the  most  eflfectual  antidote 
for  sin.  The  legislation  of  Moses  threw  a  man  more  upon 
his  own  resources,  while  that  of  Christ  aimed  constantly  to 
throw  a  person  upon  the  resources  of  God.  By  proposing  a 
perfect  standard,  it  tasght  most  clearly  human  dependence 


304  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

and  divine  strength,  and  thus,  while  it  developed  humility, 
it  at  the  same  time  inspired  the  noblest  courage.  The 
legislation  of  Christ  carried  with  it  far  more  effectual  power 
to  restrain  from  sin  than  that  of  Moses,  because,  while  that  of 
Moses  had  more  reference  to  the  outward  act,  Christ's  legis- 
lation had  peculiar  relation  to  the  disposition.  As  sin  has 
its  source  in  the  disposition,  so,  to  cure  man  of  sin,  Christ 
taught  that  the  root  of  it  existing  in  the  heart  must  be  ex- 
tracted. All  then  of  Christ's  legislation  went  directly  to  the 
source  of  all  mischief,  either  in  the  individual  or  the  commu- 
nity, and  taught  the  one  great  lesson  that  the  same  principle 
that  made  a  man  right  with  God  would  lead  him  to  be  right 
with  his  neighbor,  and  that  wherever  there  was  the  true  love 
of  the  oue,  there  also  would  be  the  true  love  of  the  other. 

Equally  different  in  the  legislation  of  Moses  and  of  Christ 
were  the  motives  to  obedience  presented  by  each.  The 
present  world,  with  the  one,  was  the  great  motive  power, 
with  its  rewards  and  punishments,  while  the  future  world 
was  that  most  constantly  appealed  unto  by  Christ.  It  there- 
fore followed  that  where  faith  existed  there  also  a  motive 
power  must  exist,  as  superior  in  reality  as  the  future  life  is 
more  important  than  the  present.  Besides,  the  very  mission 
of  Christ  demanded  a  more  vivid  presentation  of  the  future 
world ;  and  thus,  when  the  time  came  for  a  higher  revelation, 
we  see  that  it  was  given  under  just  those  circumstances  that 
made  it  a  wonderful  power  in  making  progressive  the  re- 
ligion of  Christ.  Thus  the  whole  condition  of  humanit}^  was 
changed,  or  vitally  affected,  by  the  greater  truths  communi- 
cated of  the  life  beyond  the  grave.  These  truths  had 
in  them  that  which  had  an  especial  bearing  upon  the 
soul.  Christ,  as  a  legislator,  brought  to  bear  upon  obe- 
dience all  the  motive  power  of  three  worlds.  It  was,  then, 
not  only  as  a  moralist  that  he  spoke,  but  as  a  legislator  he 
enacted;  and  while  he  borrowed  all  that  was  useful  of  that 
old  dispensation,  he  engrafted  principles  and  motives  into  the 
new  that  made  it  peculiarlj^  his  own.  In  all  the  civil  and 
social  relations  of  life,  Christ's  legislation  was  just  that  which 
made  it  adapted  to  all  ages  and   countries.     It  studiously 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  305 

avoided  having  anytbing  to  do  with  the  civil  power,  or  with 
the  merely  outward  relations  of  society,  or  with  any  mere 
social  organization.  The  supreme  wisdom  of  this  will  be  seen 
when  we  reflect  that  society  was  immeasurably  more  cor- 
rupt in  its  spirit  than  in  its  forms,  and,  in  the  nature  of  things, 
must  go  through  with  endless  outward  changes  to  be  made 
essentially  better.  Christ  therefore  shunned,  in  his  legislation 
to  his  disciples,  the  least  approximation  to  any  one  form  or 
organization  of  society.  He  recognized  most  clearly  the 
divine  authority  in  the  abstract  of  all  civil  government,  but 
he  would  not  be  a  partisan  of  any.  Thus  all  of  Christ's  legis- 
lation was  to  eifect  a  change  in  the  outward  relations  of 
society,  by  going  directly  to  the  heart  of  it  and  creating  a 
right  spirit  in  the  individual,  and,  through  the  individual,  in 
the  community.  The  spirit  right,  and,  by  an  irresistible 
law  of  moral  gravitation,  the  forms  in  time  would  be  right; 
while  the  spirit  WTong,  and  all  forms  would  be  perverted,  and 
degenerate  into  some  kind  or  other  of  civil  or  social  despot- 
ism. And  the  course  of  Christ's  legislation  was  pre-eminently 
adapted  to  the  age  in  which  he  lived.  jSTo  age  excelled  it  in 
forms  and  ceremonies,  and  none  came  up  to  it  in  a  radically 
corrupt  and  bad  spirit.  Society  was  rotten  at  its  very  core, 
and  the  first  thing  to  be  done  was  to  apply  a  remedy  to  the 
inmost  seat  of  the  disease.  IITow,  the  legalists  were  content 
with  painting  over  this  sepulcher  of  humanity ;  Christ  only 
with  raising  the  dead  bodies  in  it.  Consequently,  in  the 
memorable  instance  of  the  tribute-money,  the  woman  taken 
in  adultery,  and  the  course  taken  by  Jesus  at  Pilate's  Hall, 
we  see  how  careful  Christ  was  to  abstain  from  any  appear- 
ance of  interfering  with  the  civil  relations  of  society.  So 
in  the  ecclesiastical  and  social  relations  of  society,  Christ 
freely  mingled  with  all  classes,  and  indorsed  by  his  presence 
all  those  outward  forms  by  which  the  machinery  of  society 
moved  on;  and  yet  his  legislation  was  peculiarly  adapted,  by 
introducing  a  new  spirit,  to  work  ultimately  a  change  in  the 
form  itself.  Remember,  our  Saviour  made  laws  for  his  church 
and  the  world,  and  not  for  a  sect  or  a  nation  ;  he  inculcated 
those  principles  of  love  to  God  and  man  that,  in  their  secret 

20 


306  CHRIST  AS  A   MORALIST, 

and  powerful  movement  in  the  heart  of  society,  would  in  time 
bring  about  the  highest  moral,  civil,  and  social  elevation  of 
man,  and  ultimately  create  those  right  forms  and  rules  that 
would  secure  the  noblest  welfare  of  man  ;  but  Christ  com- 
menced with  the  root  of  society,  and  not  its  branches,  knowing 
full  wxU  that  unless  the  spirit  was  made  right,  all  its  outward 
developments  must  be  wrong. 

Let  us  now  consider  Christ  as  the  Redeemer  of  man.  Here 
we  see,  as  has  been  shown  in  the  chapter  upon  the  gospel  solu- 
tion to  the  question  of  the  sinner  saved  and  the  law  sustained, 
that  Christ  alone  met  the  conditions  of  this  most  perplexing  of 
all  problems.  But  there  is  an  aspect  to  the  subject  of  Christ 
the  Redeemer  of  man  worthy  of  ca^^eful  consideration ;  that  is, 
the  great  necessity  of  man  was  twofold, — a  vicarious  sacrifice, 
and  a  perfect  example.  This  involved  the  incarnation  of 
Christ,  and  a  sensible  and  perfect  illustration  of  all  virtue ; 
virtue  not  alone  in  the  abstract,  but  the  concrete;  virtue 
under  all  those  conditions  made  essential  for  redemption. 
]!Tow,  however  unnecessary  skeptics  of  the  present  day  may 
deem  the  incarnation  and  death  of  Christ,  yet  we  cannot 
study  the  systems  of  religion  in  the  ancient  world  without 
being  impressed  with  the  idea  that  there  ran  through  all 
pagan  idolatry  that  which  told  of  an  earnest  longing  for 
some  sensible  manifestation  of  God,  and  especially  that 
which  should  show  a  way  of  deliverance  from  sin' 

In  our  chapter  upon  the  necessity  of  a  revelation  from  God, 
it  will  be  seen  how  earnest  the  longing  for  some  manifestation 
of  God  that  had  been  for  ages  withheld  from  the  world. 
'^OY  does  it  change  the  fact  of  this  longing  that  the  imagin- 
ation had  invented  innumerable  methods  of  divine  mani- 
festation that  were  opposed  to  all  true  reason  and  good 
judgment.  Awfully  depraved  as  were  those  inventions  by 
which  God  was  brought  into  communication  with  man,  yet 
those  incarnations  that  embodied  the  idea  of  present  divin- 
ities, however  monstrous  in  their  conception,  truly  told  of  a 
want  that  had  showed  itself  from  the  earliest  ages  of  the  world. 
Now  we  say  that  the  incarnation  of  Christ  precisely  met  this 
want,  while  it  eliminated  from  it  everything  that  was  im- 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  307 

pure  and  unreasonable.  The  foct  that  Christ  in  a  vicarious 
sense  was  the  Redeemer  of  man,  as  well  as  his  Redeemer  bj  his 
holy  example,  and  that  both  his  sacrifice  and  his  life  were  di- 
vine, is  the  one  great  miracle  of  miracles,  the  central  fact  of  all 
facts,  and  the  only  thing  that  promised  to  solve  the  difficul- 
ties of  man's  existence  in  the  world.  It  is  impossible  to  hold 
converse  with  the  philosophy  of  paganism,  and  study  the 
writings  of  Homer,  Plato,  Socrates,  Cicero,  or  Virgil,  with- 
out finding  that  which  told  of  the  evil  of  sin,  and  that  which 
manifested  an  earnest  desire  to  know  some  way  by  Avhich 
man  might  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  that  enthralled 
him. 

Thus,  Young,  in  his  work  upon  the  "  Christ  of  History," 
has  well  remarked  :  "  We  cannot  hope  to  discover,  in  the  re- 
ligious of  mankind,  the  method  of  solving  the  deepest 
problem  of  Christianity,  but  it  is  quite  possible  that  they  may 
illustrate,  perhaps  confirm,  the  only  satisfactory  solution  which 
has  yet  been  suggested.  In  these  religions,  almost  without 
exception,  the  idea  of  incarnation  will  be  found  under  one 
form  or  another.  It  is  related,  that  Paul  and  Barnabas,  in 
the  city  of  Lystra,  were  about  to  receive  divine  honors ;  Bar- 
nabas was  to  be  worshiped  as  an  incarnation  of  Jupiter,  and 
Paul  as  an  incarnation  of  Mercury.  The  people  of  Lacouia 
cried,  '  The  gods  have  come  down  to  us  in  the  likeness  of 
men.'  The  noticeable  fact  is,  that  this  was  not  a  new  and 
strange  thought  to  them,  but  an  opportunity  familiar  and 
generally  received,  and  which,  therefore,  at  once  occurred  to 
them  as  afi:brding  an  easy  interpretation  of  what  they  had 
seen  and  heard  in  connection  with  the  two  foreigners.  The 
numberless  metamorphoses  of  the  gods  of  ancient  Greece 
and  Rome,  and  in  the  Eastern  world  the  incarnations  of 
Brahm,  the  avatars  of  Vishnu,  and  the  human  form  of 
Kreeshna,  and  its  reappearance  in  successive  ages,  are  signifi- 
cant and  demonstrative  on  this  subject.  Among  almost  all 
nations,  and  from  the  earliest  period  of  which  any  authentic 
record  has  been  preserved  down  to  our  own  times,  the  idea  of 
God  incarnating  himself  is  found.  But  mankind  do  not 
universally  and  for  successive  ages  adopt  that  which  is  wholly 


308  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

false.  On  tlie  most  philosophical  grounds  it  may  be  argued 
that  the  continued  and  wide  acceptance  of  the  notion  of  in- 
carnation in  the  world,  is  decisive  proof  that  it  must  have 
some  basis  of  truth.  The  idea,  indeed,  if  admitted  hymen  at 
all,  was  manifestly  for  conscience  and  reason  in  their  most 
reverent  and  subdued  exercise,  and  not  for  imagination.  It 
was  too  awfully  sacred  for  imagination,  even  in  its  most 
chastened  movements,  to  have  approached.  But  imagina- 
tion, unchasteued,  irreverent,  impure,  coarse,  and  wild,  dared 
to  violate  this  sanctity.  The  result  we  behold  in  the  con- 
tradictions, absurdities,  blasphemies,  and  offenses  against 
all  faith  and  religious  feeling  and  taste  of  which  the  world 
is  full." 

"But,  in  spite  of  the  humiliations  and  revolting  facts  of  this 
kind  which  abound,  it  may  be  argued  incontrovertibly  that 
the  idea  itself  of  incarnation  must,  from  its  universality,  have 
some  basis  of  truth.  One  of  two  things,  or  both,  may  be  legiti- 
mately presumed  :  either  this  idea  is  the  traditionary  vestige 
of  some  primitive  revelation,  or  there  must  be  some  grand 
necessity  of  universal  human  nature  which  it  is  felt  can  be 
met  only  by  the  doctrine  of  incarnation  in  one  form  or  other. 
The  deep  sense  of  such  a  necessity  all  nations  and  all  times 
have  proclaimed ;  and  does  not  Christianity  reveal  the  only 
actual  provision  which  has  been  made  to  meet  this  universal 
want  ?  It  was  a  promise  in  the  beginning,  it  was  a  hope 
and  a  faith  in  successive  ages,  and  in  the  fullness  of  the  times 
the  promise  was  fulfilled,  the  faith  and  the  hope  were  realized. 
Once  for  all  a  response  worthy  of  God  w^as  given  to  the  cry 
of  humanit}^ ;  once  for  all,  to  meet  a  grand  necessity,  to 
achieve  what  no  otherwise  could  have  been  achieved  for  the 
redemption  of  man,  God  incarnated  himself.  The  union  of 
divinity  with  humanity  is  the  onl}'  principle  which  harmo- 
nizes the  outward  facts  and  the  moral  aspects  of  the  life  of 
Jesus  Christ.  Disgusted  with  the  absurdities  and  shocked 
by  the  impurities  and  impieties  of  mythological  incarna- 
tions, conscience  and  reason  find  rest  in  oiw  incaimation  for 
all  tim£.'' 

"In  the  personal  character  of  Christ,  then,  we  have  the 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  309 

evidence  not  o\\\y  of  a  higher  office,  but  of  a  higher  nature,  than 
ever  belonged  to  man  ;  the  evidence  of  an  essential  constitu- 
tional separation  from  all  men,  in  him  who  was  holy,  harm- 
less, undeiiled,  and  separate  from  sinners  ;  in  Jesus,  the  Son 
of  Alary,  the  words  of  the  ancient  oracle  received  their  beauti- 
ful fulfillment :  '  Unto  us  a  child  is  born,  unto  us  a  son  is 
given ;  and  the  government  shall  be  upon  his  shoulders ; 
and  his  name  shall  be  called  Wonderful,  Counselor,  the 
Mighty  God,  the  Everlasting  Father,  the  Prince  of  Peace.'  " — 
Isaiah,  ix.  6. 

The  great  central  fact  of  all  revelation  is,  that  Christ  is  the 
Redeemer.  In  its  comprehensive  import  it  embodies,  as  has 
been  seen,  two  essential  ideas — first,  Christ  a  perfect  exam- 
ple ;  secondly,  Christ  a  perfect  sacrifice.  Consequently, 
while  the  -incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God  is  in  itself  the 
profoundest  of  mysteries,  it  yet  offers  the  only  solution 
to  the  question  involved  in  the  reconciliation  of  man  to 
God,  and  presents  the  only  valid  foundation  for  reason  to 
build  upon  or  faith  to  inspire  to  virtue.  But  the  incarna- 
tion of  Christ  was  the  necessary  condition  of  his  expiation 
for  sin,  just  as  his  perfect  sacrifice  is  the  only  foundation 
for  redemption. 

Let  us  now  view  Christ  under  the  aspect  of  a  king.  Here 
observe,  kingship  may  or  does  have  two  spheres  of  existence 
— one  exclusively  of  this  world,  the  other  of  the  next;  one 
temporal,  the  other  spiritual ;  one  limited  only  to  time,  the 
other  bounded  only  by  eternity.  Observe,  then,  that  at  the 
very  commencement  of  Christ's  ministry  our  Saviour  studi- 
ously avoided  the  former  kingship,  and  this  resolution  on 
many  occasions  flashed  out  with  peculiar  power.  ]^ot  only 
did  Christ  not  seek  temporal  power,  wealth,  fame,  or  influ- 
ence, he  upon  every  occasion  avoided  it.  The  precise  difii- 
culty  with  the  Jews  was  simply  that  Christ  w^ould  not  assume 
worldly  kingship.  It  mortified  their  pride,  repelled  their 
hopes,  irritated  beyond  measure  all  their  national  vanity,  to 
see  Christ  performing  the  works  of  a  prophet  of  God,  and 
yet  avoiding  and  contemning  that  earthly  position  which  the 
Jews  reasonably  thought  he  should  take.    Thus,  -we  read,  the 


310  CHRIST  AS  A   MORALIST, 

multitude  sought  to  make  Christ  a  king,  but  he  would  not 
be  induced  thus  to  be  made  their  earthly  master. 

Christ  disclaimed  all  pretensions  of  a  worldly  nature;  he 
forbade  his  disciples  to  harbor  the  thought  even  that  his  king- 
dom was  of  this  world,  and  to  the  Jews  this  was  peculiarly 
vexatious.  With  ample  credentials  to  place  him  in  the  high- 
est earthly  position,  he  yet  promised  his  disciples  only  the 
contempt  and  persecution  of  the  world.  jSTow  this  attitude 
upon  the  part  of  Christ  was  the  real  cause  of  his  rejectiou 
by  the  Jews.  What  they  looked  for  was  an  earthly  king ; 
what  they  desired  was  one  who  would  lead  them  on  to  vic- 
tory and  make  the  lloman  nation  let  go  its  grasp  upon  their 
national  life.  A  king  was  the  very  thing  they  dreamed  of 
and  most  earnestly  prayed  for;  it  formed  the  absorbing  sub- 
ject of  their  thoughts,  and  was  that  which  \\\qj  expected  the 
Messiah  to  be.  And  Christ  boldly  told  the  Jews  he  w^as  a 
king;  he  asserted  this  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Pilate; 
he  proclaimed  it  wherever  he  went ;  he  died  with  his  king- 
ship prominent  in  his  words  and  actions.  But  Christ,  to  be 
consistentl}'  a  Redeemer,  must  be  only  a  spiritual  king; 
and  no  other  kingship  was  in  harmony  with  the  great  end 
of  an  atonement ;  and  this  spiritual  kingship  carried  with 
it  the  two  greatest  of  all  attributes, — universality  and  eter- 
nity. It  was  a  kingship  for  all  ages,  and  a  kingship  for 
all  conditions  and  races  of  men.  It  was  world-wide  and 
unending. 

Such  a  kingship  was  of  necessity  spiritual,  and  demanded 
of  all  its  subjects  faith  and  love.  Consequently,  it  was  more 
far-reaching  in  its  claims  and  ends  as  the  obedience  of  the 
spirit,  its  affection  and  confidence,  ai'e  infinitely  superior  to 
outv/ard  obedience,  or  submission  to  visible  and  worldly 
power.  The  kingship  of  Christ  was  of  just  that  character 
that  made  it  singularly  appropriate  to  the  object  of  his  mis- 
sion and  the  benetit  of  man.  Christ  did  not  seek  any  other 
influence  over  his  disciples  than  that  which  proceeded  from 
the  voluntary  homage  of  the  heart  and  was  the  free  expres- 
sion of  aftection  and  confidence.  Consequently,  the  kingdom 
of  Christ  diriercd  altogether  in  the  nature  of  the  power  em- 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  311 

ployed  from  that  of  earthly  kingdoms,  which  was  simply  the 
law  of  force^  or  the  authority  of  the  sword.  This  was  the 
glory  of  Rome,  of  her  Caesars  and  her  Herods  and  Pilates  ; 
but  the  law  of  love  was  the  propelling  influence  of  Christ's 
kingdom.  Its  throne  was  in  the  spiritual  nature  of  man, 
that  comprehended  the  conscience,  reason,  and  aifection;  con- 
sequently, in  all  the  civil  relations  of  life,  Christ  uniformly 
abstained  from  any  acts  or  words  that  would  make  him  a 
party  to  any  civil  authority.  He  inculcated  submission  and 
obedience,  while  he  would  not  be  made  a  judge  to  indorse 
any  party  whatever  in  authority. 

Thus,  in  the  tribute-money,  Christ  laid  down  a  rule  of 
universal  application,  while  with  infinite  wisdom  he  confined 
himself  alone  to  that  kingship  which  was  spiritual.  IsTor  was 
it  possible,  for  the  end  in  view,  that  Christ  should  combine 
temporal  and  spiritual  power,  an  earthly  and  a  heavenly  king- 
ship; both  must  be  kept  distinct,  for  any  alliance  with  the 
kino;doms  of  the  world  would  be  fatal  to  his  o-reat  end  of  re- 
demptiou  from  sin.  This  was  chief  in  all  the  thoughts  of 
Christ,  and  therefore  his  kingship  must  have  enstamped  upon 
it  universality  and  eternity,  and  that  only  was  consistent 
with  its  spirituality.  But  there  was  a  sense  where  the  con- 
dition of  redemption  was  changed,  when  the  cure  of  sin 
working  inwardlj^  had  extended  to  that  which  was  outward 
and  bodily,  where  with  the  highest  truth  it  may  be  said  that 
the  kingdom  of  Christ  was  sensible,  visible,  and  of  the 
world  to  come.  Christ  uniforml}'  taught  that  he  was  not 
only  a  spiritual  king,  claiming  the  deepest  homage  of  the 
heart,  demanding  obedience  in  all  relations  of  life,  and  im- 
posing sanctions  that  embraced  three  worlds,  but  that  when 
the  set  time  should  come,  that  kingship  would  assume  an  out- 
ward and  visible  form,  as  in  this  life  it  was  strictly  spiritual 
and  had  its  sway  over  only  the  mind  and  heart.  Repeat- 
edly did  Christ  take  upon  himself  that  which  most  signifi- 
cantly told  of  his  royal  authority;  but  he  also  declared  that 
the  time  would  come  when  his  kingship  should  be  as  sensi- 
ble and  visible  as  it  had  been  spiritual,  and'  that  as  truly 
would  he  be  outwardlj^  a  king  as  then  he  was  spiritually 


312  CHRIST  AS  A  MORALIST, 

unknown  and  unrecognized,  except  by  those  who  in  their 
hearts  submitted  to  his  dirine  authority ;  and  the  reason  hxy 
in  the  fact,  that  as  the  cure  of  sin  was  to  commence  inwardly 
and  work  outwardly,  so  also  should  Christ's  reign  correspond 
with  the  exact  progress  of  redemption  from  its  imperfect  to 
its  perfected  condition. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  a  true  idea  of  the  kingship  of 
Christ  is  the  very  key-note  to  the  understanding  of  his  in- 
structions to  his  disciples  and  his  mission  to  save  sinners. 
It  has  been  seen  that  Christ  had  one  great  end  in  view,  that 
absorbed  all  his  tlioughts  and  inspired  to  all  his  sacrifices 
That  end  was  redemption, — first  of  the  soul,  then  of  the  body. 
ISTow,  the  assumption  of  an  outward  and  earthly  kingship 
would  have  defeated  this  end  when  our  Saviour  came  into 
the  world.  It  would,  indeed,  have  exactly  corresponded  with 
the  views  and  feelings  of  the  Jews,  but  it  would  also  have 
extinguished  all  those  hopes  built  upon  the  universality  and 
spirituality  of  his  kingdom.  Christ  aimed  in  every  way  to 
disappoint  and  thwart  the  contracted  and  selfish  views  held 
of  his  kingship  by  the  Jews.  To  gratify  them  was  to  sacri- 
fice his  .mission.  Consequently,  our  Redeemer  studiously 
avoided  all  that  favored  the  expectations  of  his  countrymen. 
His  mission  was  not  for  a  nation,  but  for  the  world;  and, 
therefore,  the  spirituality  rather  than  the  visible  or  outward 
manifestation  of  his  kingdom  was  chiefly  aimed  at.  What 
Christ  sought  after  was,  to  convince  all  that  an  atonement 
for  sin  was  inconsistent  with  worldly  kingship ;  for  redemp- 
tion not  onl}^  involved  a  cross  upon  the  part  of  Christ,  but 
also  self-sacrifice  upon  that  of  his  disciples.  How  incon- 
gruous with  this,  any  other  position  than  that  which  Christ 
actually  took ! 

It  will,  therefore,  be  seen  that  the  mission  of  Christ  Avas 
peculiarly  spiritual,  even  as  sacrificial,  and  aimed  at  nothing 
less  than  making  practicable  and  universal  a  way  of  recon- 
ciliation with  God,  and  the  very  reason  that  led  the  Jews 
to  reject  Christ  was  the  highest  reason,  rightly  considered, 
for  receiving  him.  The  difiiculty  with  the  Jew  was,  that 
in  interpreting  the  prophets  no  true  distinction  was  made 


LEGISLATOR,  REDEEMER,  AND   KING.  313 

between  the  first  and  the  second  coming  of  Christ ;  but  the 
Old,  even  as  the  iSTew  Testament,  made  a  world-wide  differ- 
ence in  these  two  great  and  most  momentous  events.  The 
first  coming  of  Christ  must,  of  necessity,  be  that  of  humilia- 
tion, while  his  second  coming  bad  only  the  marks  of  regal 
triumph  and  supremacy.  Christ's  first  coming  was  more  to 
secure  the  great  end  of  a  perfect  priesthood,  while  his  second 
coming  involved  especially  the  idea  of  a  perfect  kingship;  and 
yet  the  kingdom  of  Christ  was  as  real  in  his  first  as  it  will  be 
in  his  second  coming,  only  it  will  then  be  both  spiritual  and 
visible  and  possess  all  those  characteristics  that  will  adapt  it 
for  a  sphere  of  existence  altogether  different.  Consequently, 
we  see  the  consummate  wisdom  Christ  always  displayed 
when  the  subject  of  his  kingship  was  alluded  to. 

In  this  world  everything  earthly  and  sensual  was  elimi- 
nated from  it,  because  it  was  not  of  this  earth ;  it  coveted 
neither  its  favors  nor  trembled  beneath  its  frowns ;  it  bor- 
rowed not  one  feature  in  common  with  the  kino-doms  of  this 
life ;  it  presented  a  marked  contrast  to  everything  that 
attracted  the  admiration  and  love  of  worldly  characters,  and 
sought  only  to  reveal  itself  as  spiritual  and  universal.  The 
very  comprehensiveness  of  the  spirit  embodied  in  it  was  fatal 
to  the  hopes  of  the  Jews ;  and,  while  they  aimed  only  to  secure 
that  which  was  national,  Christ  thought  only  of  that  which 
was  designed  for  all  men  and  all  ages.  And  here  notice  a  most 
singular  and  extraordinary  evidence  of  the  divine  character  of 
our  Saviour's  mission :  it  was  not  only  absolutely  original  in 
its  conception,  but  in  its  execution.  It  borrowed  nothing  of 
the  age  he  lived  in,  it  appealed  to  none  of  the  hopes  common 
to  mankind,  it  resorted  to  none  of  those  measures  essential 
for  securing  the  prizes  of  earth.  We  find  nothing  in  the  life 
or  instructions  of  Christ  that  would  give  the  least  idea  of 
being  a  copy  from  any  human  original.  Christ  was  his  own 
original.  Xothing  like  him  ever  before  appeared  on  this 
earth,  and  nothing  in  all  subsequent  ages  has  ever  assumed 
the  lineaments  of  his  person.  And  the  distinguishing  pecu- 
liarity of  the  life  of  Christ  consisted  in  his  reserve  both  of 
power  and  knowledge.     It  was  this  that  filled  his  disciples 


314  CHRIST  AS  A   310  R  A  LI  ST,  ETC. 

with  such  admiration  and  awe.  They  saw  Christ  giving  at 
times,  for  most  beneficent  ends,  the  most  amazing  evidence  of 
power,  and,  yet  while  subject  to  the  wants  of  humanity,  taking 
notliing  for  himself;  ever  willing  to  do  good  to  others,  but 
never  solicitous  to  appropriate  even  needful  comforts  for  his 
own  person.  He  walked  the  ground  a  living  embodiment  of 
all  that  was  unselfish  and  generous.  The  Lamb  of  God  was 
the  appropriate  designation  of  his  character.  In  that  form  of 
divinest  workmanship  there  were  stores  of  inexhaustible 
knowledge,  even  as  power.  And  yet  the  reticence  of  Christ 
was  quite  as  extraordinary  as  his  hours  of  instruction.  Our 
Saviour  never  deviated  from  one  great  end,  even  that  of  the 
redemption  of  body  and  soul,  and  his  kingship  in  the  age  of 
his  first  advent  was  just  that  which  corresponded  to  the 
actual  wants  of  the  world.  A  kingdom  of  love,  as  distin- 
guished from  a  kingdom  of  force,  was  the  leading  feature  of 
Christ's  spiritual  reign,  and  in  the  very  principles  which 
marked  its  development  and  the  moral  triumphs  which 
followed  in  its  progress  there  was  revealed  an  infinite  supe- 
riority to  all  the  kingdoms  of  this  earth. 


CHAPTER   IV. 


EVIDENCE    OF   MIRACLES. 


We  define  a  miracle  to  be  a  visible  sign  given  directly  and  in- 
telligently to  man  from  God,  to  show  the  suspension  of  a  law  of 
nature,  or  that  God  has  interposed  his  power  to  control  the 
established  course  of  nature.  We  consider  miracles  that 
are  real  as  strictly  supernatural,  or  something  above  human 
or  angelic  power,  bat  we  do  not  mean  to  comprehend  in 
miracles  all  signs,  or  wonders,  or  that  even  which  is  not  hu- 
man. We  W'Ould  not  call  the  agenc}'  of  good  or  bad  angels 
miraculous,  although  superhuman.  Nor  do  we  mean  to  say 
that  there  may  be.  no  cases  on  record  where  God  permits 
things  to  be  done  which  ma}'  not  have  very  much  the  appear- 
ance of  miracles ;  but  what  we  do  mean  to  say  is,  that  when 
God  works  miracles  they  are  so  clearly  defined,  they  come 
under  such  circumstances  and  for  such  occasions,  that  show 
them  distinctly  to  be  from  him,  and  not  from  any  creature 
source. 

We  do  not  purpose  so  much  to  investigate  what  may  be 
miraculous,  or  what  is  the  extent  of  miracles,  as  to  confine 
our  remarks  to  that  which  all  must  admit  to  proceed  from  a 
visible  interposition  of  God,  of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  impos- 
sible to  be  performed  by  any  creature,  or  to  take  place  ac- 
cording to  the  known  course  of  nature. 

The  question  now  is,  Is  there  any  probability  that  God 
would  work  miracles  to  substantiate  a  revelation  of  his  wuU? 
We  reply,  that  it  is  in  the  highest  degree  probable  that  God 
would  give  such  credentials  to  his  will.  Consider  the  end 
to  be  attained  unto.  The  infinite  Being  who  holds  all  natural 
law  in  his  hands,  can,  whenever  he  sees  fit,  either  break  in 
upon  their  uniformity,  or  so  control  them,  or  introduce  in 
connection  with  them  other  laws,  as  to  secure  the  great  re- 

(315) 


316  EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES. 

suit  of  miracle,  so  sensible  as  to  strike  conviction  of  their 
divine  origin  in  the  dullest  minds.  The  simple  question  to 
consider  is,  Does  not  the  Bible,  revealing  Christ  the  Saviour 
of  sinners,  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  the 
judgment  and  the  resurrection,  need  miracles  as  suitable 
credentials  with  mankind  ?  The  question  is  not  whether 
there  is  evidence  enough  without  miracles  to  authorize  us  to 
believe  and  obey  the  Bible,  but  whether,  constituted  as  men 
are,  without  miracles  the  Bible  would  be  believed  in,  or  be 
received  as  from  God.  What  men  should  do,  and  what  they 
will  do,  are  two  questions  altogether  ditierent.  How  could 
Christ  prove,  without  miracles,  to  the  Jews  his  divine  mis- 
sion ?  How,  w^ithout  miracles,  in  the  early  days  of  Chris- 
tianity, could  it  have  made  way  against  the  opposition  and 
unbelief  of  the  world  ?  How  could  Moses  have  delivered 
from  Egypt  the  Israelites,  without  the  miraculous  interposi- 
tion of  God?  But  more  than  this,  the  Bible  comes  to  us 
denouncing  the  severest  punishment  to  those  who  reject  it 
and  do  not  in  their  hearts  receive  the  great  author  of  Chris- 
tianity. Why  such  severity  of  punishment,  if  so  important 
and  conclusive  credentials  as  miracles  are  not  given  ? 

Christ  even  rested  also  his  claims  as  the  Son  of  God  upon 
miracles.  He  openly  said  that  he  was  not  to  be  believed  in 
unless  he  did  the  works  that  no  other  man  could  do,  works 
above  all  human  or  angelic  power,  works  that  God  only 
could  perform,  who  alone  controls  nature's  laws,  and  can  break 
in  upon  their  undeviating  uniformity.  Considering  the 
greatness  of  the  end  to  be  accomplished,  considering  that 
the  very  existence  of  Christianity  depended  upon  miracles, 
is  it  not  highly  probable  that  God  would  work  them  ?  Con- 
sider the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  our  wants :  why  then 
should  we  not  have  the  royal  seal  of  its  divine  origin  ?  Here 
is  a  watch :  it  is  well  made,  every  wheel  is  in  its  place,  every 
part  is  adjusted  to  its  separate  office,  nothing  is  absent  but 
the  hands  to  point  out  the  minutes  and  the  hours:  why 
should  not  those  hands  be  given  to  the  watch  ?  They  go  to 
complete  one  great  design :  why  not  given  ? 

Now,  here  is  a  revelation  of  a  great  system  of  redemption 


EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES.  317 

perfectly  adapted  to  all  our  wants,  but  it  needs  credentials 
that  it  has  come  from  God,  credentials  of  such  a  nature  that 
if  wanting,  millions  who  receive  the  Bible  as  divine  would 
reject  to  their  ruin.  Admitting  the  existence  of  an  infinitely 
powerful,  wise,  and  good  God,  is  it  not  in  the  highest  degree 
probable  they  would  be  given  ?  God  is  able  to  work  mira- 
cles ;  there  is  then  no  want  of  power  thus  to  do.  God  is  in- 
linitely  wise  to  secure  the  great  end  of  redemption  ;  there  is, 
then,  every  probability  upon  the  side  of  wisdom  that  mira- 
cles would  be  worked.  God  is  as  good  as  he  is  powerful  and 
wise ;  there  is,  then,  in  his  mercy,  the  strongest  presump- 
tion that  there  will  be  miracles. 

But  Christ,  professing  himself  to  be  from  God,  and  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,  repeatedly  declaring  his  mission  divine, 
proposing  to  himself  the  amazing  end  of  the  redemption  of 
the  soul  forever  and  the  salvation  of  the  world,  of  necessity 
based  the  great  evidence  of  his  supernatural  advent  to  this 
earth  upon  miracles;  he  boldly  asserted  that  if  he  did  not 
the  works  that  no  man  could  do,  then  he  was  not  entitled  to 
belief,  while  he  denounced  the  severest  condemnation  upon 
those  who  would  not  believe  upon  him,  simply  because  they 
refused  to  credit  that  which  could  not  with  reason  be  denied. 
Now,  the  whole  mission  of  Christ,  the  age  in  which  he  ap- 
peared, the  violent  enemies  encountered,  and  all  the  obsta- 
cles so  formidable  to  be  mastered,  made  miracles  of  the 
utmost  importance  to  the  success  of  Christianity:  is  it  not 
most  reasonable  to  suppose  that  such  credentials  would  be 
granted  by  an  all-powerful,  wise,  and  merciful  God  ? 

The  great  reason  why  many  reject  miracles  arises  from 
two  errors:  first,  overlooking  the  fact  of  a  personal  God  of 
infinite  freedom  and  power,  holding  all  laws  in  complete  sub- 
jection to  his  will,  the  absolute  originator  of  all  existence, 
and  its  laws,  material  and  immaterial ;  and  then  in  believing 
in  no  other  laws  but  the  laws  of  nature,  and  the  eternity  of 
their  duration,  even  as  undeviating  uniformity.  Conse- 
quently, when  miracle  is  spoken  of,  they  say,  Will  God  vio- 
late his  own  laws,  will  he  act  against  nature,  will  he  ordain 
a  method  of   operation  in   nature,   and    yet  counteract  it  ? 


318  EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES. 

But  all  this  reasoning  springs  from  a  false  view  of  nature. 
Nature  is  made  for  a  certain  end;  but  suppose  a  higher  end 
is  to  be  secured,  will  nature,  by  its  uniformity  of  laws  unhi- 
terrupted,  be  permitted  by  God  to  defeat  this  end  ?  Will  God 
be  so  dependent  upon  his  own  workmanship  as  not  to  show 
to  his  creatures  his  superiority  to  it  ? 

As  theists,  we  cannot  limit  God  to  the  exclusive  sphere  of 
his  natural  laws.  God  must  have  a  sphere  of  action  above 
those  laws,  and  able,  whenever  some  great  and  wise  end  is 
to  be  secured,  to  take  away  the  veil  of  nature,  remove  the 
tliick  folds  of  its  garment,  and  show  visibly  and  nakedly, 
without  any  obstructing  medium,  the  glittering  sign  of  his 
awful  presence.  But  more  than  this :  we  contend  that  if 
miracles  are  not  in  accordance  with  the  existing  laws  of  na- 
ture, they  may  be  in  perfect  harmony  with  other  laws.  If 
God  suspends  one  kind  of  law,  it  may  be  to  introduce  another 
and  superior  kind  of  hxw;  and  if  creating  power  has  existed 
in  tlie  past  ages  of  the  world,  and  does  now,  and  will  ever, 
exist  with  God,  then  certainly  it  is  most  absurd  to  say  that 
the  Almighty  has  not  controlling,  suspending,  regulating, 
or  counteracting  power.  If  God  can  make  a  world,  he  can 
make  it  move  as  he  pleases. 

Did  the  Bible  contain  idle  fables,  absurd  contradictions, 
immoral  instructions;  did  it  approve  of  theft,  profanity, 
avarice,  pride,  deceit,  impurity,  murder;  was  its  general 
scope  in  favor  of  selfishness,  or  parental  or  civil  disobedi- 
ence, a  disposition  lawless  of  human  or  divine  restraints, 
such  a  Bible  would  have  an  internal  evidence  that  it  was  not 
from  God,  that  would,  in  the  highest  degree,  make  miracles 
in  its  confirmation  improbable,  and  even  impossible.  But 
from  an  examination  of  the  general  scope  of  the  Bible,  and 
its  adaptation  to  elevate  and  bless  man,  we  find  directly  tlie 
reverse.  Such  being  the  case,  with  a  revelation  worthy  of  mir- 
acles, and  needing  miracles  to  make  it  to  be  received,  where 
the  slightest  improbability  of  miracles  ?  Where  is  there  the 
least  evidence,  from  the  uniformitj'  of  nature's  laws,  that  mir- 
acles would  not  be  given,  considering  the  end  to  be  attained? 

Let   it   be    remembered  we   are    arguing  as   theists,  not 


EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES.  319 

atheists.  We  believe  in  a  personal  God  infinitely  higher 
than  natural  law,  in  his  power  able  to  work  miracles,  and 
from  his  wisdom  and  goodness  disposed  thus  to  do,  provided 
there  is  an  end  to  be  attained  unto  worth}'  of  the  breaking  in 
upon  the  uniformity  of  natural  law.  Christianity  presents 
itself  as  such  an  end.  Everything  depends,  in  its  reception, 
upon  miracles.  There  are  the  mightiest  obstacles  to  be  over- 
come, the  most  formidable  corruption  of  human  nature  and 
the  world.  Where,  then,  the  improbability  that  God's  am- 
bassador to  this  earth  should  bring  the  royal  seal  of  his 
divine  commission  ?  Is  there  not,  then,  the  highest  moral 
certainty  that  if  such  an  ambassador  does  come  to  man,  he 
will  have  the  seal  of  heaven  to  make  evident  his  divine 
origin  ? 

There  can,  then,  be  no  presumptive  evidence  against  the 
miracles  of  Christianity  simply  from  the  uniformity  of 
natural  law?  This  uniformity  is  the  very  thing  that  consti- 
tutes the  idea  of  a  miracle  Were  this  uniformity  broken  in 
upon  every  day  miracles  would  become  common  events,  and 
lose  all  their  value;  but  worse  than  this,  all  certainty,  and 
all  the  plain  rules  of  living  and  thinking,  w^ould  be  deranged, 
natural  law  would  lose  all  its  importance,  and  confusion  reign 
triumphant.  God,  who  does  nothing  without  a  wise  end, 
has  made,  therefore,  miracles  of  rare  occurrence,  and  only  at 
great  epochs  of  time  and  emergency  of  events.  Miracles  are 
the  reverse  movement  of  the  great  engine  of  God's  provi- 
dence. They  constitute  an  indispensable  check  to  natural 
law.  They  mark  the  signal  sovereignty  of  God  over  law, 
and  reveal  a  far  grander  power  behind  the  mighty  machinery 
of  the  universe,  by  which  God,  at  fit  times,  interposes  to  ac- 
complish his  vast  purposes  of  wisdom. 

While,  therefore,  under  common  circumstances  and  on  or- 
dinary occasions  miracles  are  the  most  improbable  of  events, 
and  ought  not  to  be  believed  in,  yet,  in  extraordinary  emer- 
gencies, when  certain  occasions  of  vast  moment  transpire, 
they  are  of  all  things  the  most  probable.  Thus,  we  find,  with 
the  great  multitude  of  Christians,  the  strongest  proof  of  the 
validity  of  miracles  consists  in  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to 


320  EVIDENCE  OF  MIRACLES. 

their  wants;  and  because  of  their  absolute  necessity  to  sub- 
stantiate the  divine  mission  of  Christ  a  supernatural  revela- 
tion must  have  a  supernatural  proof.  Christ,  if  true  in  his 
words,  must  be  true  in  his  works.  If  his  veracity  is  to  be 
believed  in,  then  the  miraculous  evidence  of  that  veracity 
must  be  credited.  Miracles  are  to  be  believed,  not  only 
upon  the  ground  that  a  most  wise  and  beneficent  end  was 
secured  by  them,  but  because  the  truthfulness  of  Chris- 
tianity hangs  upon  them. 

The  ethics  of  the  Bible  all  depend  upon  its  proofs,  and  its 
proofs  upon  its  ethics.  The  supernatural  is  the  foundation 
upon  which  the  whole  system  of  redemption  rests. 

How  certain,  then,  that  God  will  work  miracles  when  some 
great  end  is  to  be  attained  by  them  ;  some  end  honorable  to 
God,  and  in  harmony  with  the  noblest  interests  of  man.  This 
is  not  only  theologically  true,  but  true  also  to  science.  "We 
assert  that  whatever  science  does  say  upon  miraculous  inter- 
positions at  great  epochs  of  time  is  all  upon  the  side  of  reve- 
lation, and  corresponds  altogether  with  the  view,  that 
whenever  some  mighty  end  was  to  be  attained  unto  that 
natural  law  could  not  reach,  that  end  was  consummated  by 
miracles,  by  the  setting  aside  of  natural  law,  or  by  the  direct 
interposition  of  God.  Thus,  in  the  solid  stratas  of  the  earth 
are  piled,  with  the  regularity  of  shelves  in  a  book-case,  im- 
mense masses  of  different  orders  of  animals,  commencing  with 
the  inferior  type  of  animal  organization  and  going  up  to  the 
highest  rank  of  creatures  below  man,  reptiles,  fishes,  birds, 
and  quadrupeds.  This  earth  shows  unmistakable  evidence 
of  the  uniformity  of  natnral  law  being  broken  in  upon,  that 
there  were  epochs  of  time  when  changes  took  place  that 
can  be  accounted  for  by  no  system  of  gradual  development 
according  to  law,  but  only  by  a  sudden,  direct,  and  violent 
interruption  of  law  and  miraculous  interposition  of  God. 

But  we  have  an  additional  evidence  from  reason  to  believe 
that  natural  law  may  be  suspended  and  miracle  intervene. 
Suppose  natural  law  either  could  not,  or  would  not,  in  its 
uniformity,  at  any  time  be  suspended ;  suppose  its  course 
was  so  undeviating  that  no  end  to  be  accomplished,  however 


EVIDENCE  OF  MIRACLES.  321 

worthy,  would  avail  to  have  it  suspended, — where  the  visi- 
ble evidence  to  man  of  the  sovereignty  of  God  over  matter  ? 
Butworse  than  this  ;  would  not  law  be  deified  at  the  expense 
of  God  ?  Would  not  God  be  forever  forgotten  by  sinners 
when  they  never  saw  nature's  uniformity  broken  in  upon  ? 
Here  it  is  that  miracles,  under  some  circumstances,  are  so 
necessary  and  so  probable.  Here  it  is  that  we  find  God 
teaching  man  lessons  alike  of  his  omnipotence  and  bis 
wisdom.  We  come,  then,  to  the  conclusion,  that  so  exalted 
is  the  end  Christianity  is  designed  to  subserve,  so  worthy  the 
object  that  it  aims  to  secure,  that  miracles  are  not  only  in 
the  highest  degree  probable,  but  necessary. 

Upon  what  ground  are  we  then  to  believe  that  miracles  by 
God  have  been  worked  to  give  credit  to  the  claims  of  revela- 
tion ?  There  are  but  two  possible  grounds, — that  of  sight,  of 
actual  observation  ourselves,  and  that  of  the  testimony  of 
others.  But  it  is  more  than  eighteen  hundred  years  since 
Christ  died :  more  than  three  thousand  years  since  the  won- 
ders of  Egypt  and  the  giving  the  law  upon  Sinai:  more 
than  four  thousand  years  since  the  flood.  Upon  what  ground, 
but  that  of  testimony,  can  we  believe  in  these  miracles  ? 
Personal  observation  of  these  miracles,  to  us,  is  out  of  the 
question.  In  what  way  can  we  believe  in  them,  if  not  by 
testimony?  There  are  those  who  have  said,  "We  will  not 
believe  a  miracle  unless  we  can  see  it."  A  French  iniidel 
once  said,  "  Why  does  not  God  show  an  evidence  of  mira- 
cles by  writing  his  name  upon  the  sky?"  Suppose  God 
should  do  just  what  the  folly  of  some  would  have  him  do, 
work  miracles  ever}'  day 'and  before  all  mankind  for  their 
convenience :  what  would  be  the  result  ?  First,  there  being 
only  the  unworthy  end  to  accomplish  of  gratifying  an  idle 
curiosity,  the  highest  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  Bible 
miracles  would  be  taken  away  ;  and  secondlj',  these  events  so 
common  would  interrupt  all  the  harmon}'  of  natural  laws 
and  break  up  the  whole  system  of  nature's  uniformity.  Con- 
fusion would  take  the  place  of  order,  and  uncertainty  derange 
all  human  foresight.  Who  would  travel,  if  the  certainty  was 
as  great  of  going  backward  as  forward  ?     Who  would  eat,  if 

21 


322  EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES. 

there  was  a  probability  as  strong  of  starving  on  food  as  re- 
ceiving benefit  from  it  ?  Is  it  not  most  unreasonable,  then, 
to  demand  of  God  miracles,  when  there  is  neither  a  worthy 
end  to  be  reached,  nor  benefit  secured  ? 

When  it  can  be  shown  that  natural  law  is  unable  to  secure 
the  end  that  miracle  does,  that  some  great  epoch  in  human 
history  has  come  making  necessary  the  interposition  of  God, 
when  it  can  be  shown  that  nature  is  utterly  helpless  to  secure 
the  noblest  welfare  of  man,  and  that  the  highest  moral  con- 
siderations demand  the  manifestation  of  the  supernatural, 
then  the  evidence  of  testimony  is  of  the  greatest  value.  A 
celebrated  infidel,  of  more  acuteness  than  wit,  and  more 
sophistry  than  wisdom,  had  the  presumption  in  an  essay 
upon  miracles  to  say  that  "  no  amount  of  testimony  could 
prove  the  miracles  of  the  Bible, — that  experience  was  greater 
against  them  than  for  them."  Upon  the  atheist's  ground,  or 
that  of  the  pantheist,  that  there  is  no  God  in  distinction  from 
his  works,  no  independent  Being  infinitely  above  and  separate 
from  nature,  or  that  nature  itself  is  God,  the  opponents  of 
Hume  could  not  fairly  reply  to  his  arguments  ;  he  might  well 
say  that  the  experience  of  man  in  the  uniformity  of  natural  law 
should  outweigh  all  evidence  to  the  contrary.  But  there  was 
another  ground,  where  a  child  might  contend  with  the 
greatest  of  skeptics  and  come  oft"  a  victor, — it  was  that  of 
theism, — the  existence  of  a  personal  God  superior  to  all  law ; 
one  who  had  the  power  to  interrupt  his  laws,  or  suspend 
them,  or  to  introduce  other  and  higher  laws,  and  the  wisdom 
thus  to  do  whenever  some  worthy  and  glorious  end  w^as  to 
be  subserved  by  thus  acting.  All  argument  is  thrown  away 
with  a  man  upon  miracles  who  does  not  recognize  and  feel 
the  reality  of  an  infinitely  wise,  good,  and  powerful  God. 
That  admitted,  and  then  we  can  take  up  all  testimony  for 
the  miracles  of  revelation  with  as  little  embarrassment  as 
the  testimony  that  is  given  to  us  to  prove  the  existence  of 
Alexander,  or  Csesar,  or  Napoleon,  especially  when^we  show 
the  necessity  of  the  Bible  for  the  wants  of  man,  and  its 
adaptation  for  the  human  family  in  all  ages,  and  the  wise 
and  benevolent  end  that  the  miracles  of  the  Bible  are  de- 
signed to  secure. 


EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES.  323 

Our  argumeut  is  then  narrowed  down  to  the  simple  point, 
Have  we  good  testimony-  for  the  miracles  of  the  Bible  ?  To 
this  we  reply,  more  conclusive,  more  irresistible,  more  con- 
firmed by  friends  and  foes,  than  can  be  given  of  any  facts  of 
ancient  history  uninspired. 

It  is  no  small  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  the  Bible 
miracles  that,  after  more  than  eighteen  centuries  of  the  most 
searching  scrutiny,  millions  of  the  human  race,  all  through 
this  long  interval  of  time,  have  believed  in  them.  Who  are 
those  millions?  Are  they  found  among  the  ignorant  or  most 
enlightened,  of  mankind  ?  Are  they  of  the  wisest  and  best, 
or  are  they  seen  among  the  dullest  and  worst,  of  men  ?  No- 
thing can  be  more  evident  than  that  where  Christianity  pre- 
vails, and  is  most  from  the  heart  received,  there  exists  the 
strongest  faith  in  miracles  as  recorded  in  the  Bible,  and  there 
is  shown  the  highest  type  of  whatever  is  noble,  and  pure, 
and  intelligent. 

One  thing  is  certain;  if  Christianity  is  anything,  it  is 
that  which  is  supernatural,  and  if  its  miracles  are  removed 
we  take  from  it  all  that  makes  it  a  religion  for  sinners..  Elimi- 
nate from  the  Bible  its  divine  element,  and  we  have  nothing 
left  but  a  residuum  of  rationalism,  as  empty  of  all  power  to 
benefit  man  as  the  teachings  of  any  heathen  moralist.  It 
can  be  shown  that  no  false  religion  could  go  through  the 
ordeal  of  the  Bible. 

Mohammed  never  dared  to  base  the  reception  of  the  Ko- 
ran upon  miracles.  Coming  in  the  darkest  age  of  the  w^orld, 
and  among  a  people  the  most  credulous,  yet  even  this  most 
successful  of  impostors  never  presumed  to  work  miracles,  or 
his  follow^ers  to  believe  that  he  did.  But  the  Bible  rests  the 
evidence  of  its  divinity,  and  its  claim  to  be  loved  and  re- 
ceived, upon  miracles.  Christ  came  with  the  w^ords  ever 
upon  his  lips,  "  Believe  not  unless  I  do  the  w^orks  no  other 
man  can  do."  Our  Saviour  rested  his  mission  upon  miracles. 
This  was  the  test  he  oifered  to  all.  Is  it  possible  that  the 
Jews,  in  the  most  enlightened  age,  never  would  have  found 
out  the  deception,  if  no  miracles  were  worked  ?  Is  it  pos- 
sible that  when  Christ  w^as  arraigned  for  trial    before  the 


324  EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES. 

Jewish  Sanhedrim  and  the  Roman  governor,  no  charge 
would  have  been  brought  against  him  of  attempting  to  de- 
ceive by  false  miracles,  if  indeed  Christ  worked  no  miracles? 
Xow,  the  great  fact  that  is  ever  to  be  borne  in  mind  re- 
specting the  miracles  of  the  Bible,  is  simply  this :  they  con.o 
under  circumstances  and  upon  occasions  essentially  diiFercct 
from  all  false  miracles  or  wonders.  It  is  the  moral  element 
connected  with  Scripture  miracles  that  makes  them  so  prob- 
able. It  is  because  they  are  worked  for  no  frivolous  end; 
they  come  when  the  necessities  of  man  really  demand  ;  they 
appear  at  those  epochs  of  time  when  the  impotence  of  natural 
law  is  self-evident ;  where  God  is  needed  to  interpose  with  a 
visible  demonstration  of  his  power,  to  flash  conviction  upon 
the  mind.  Consequently,  the  marked  feature  of  the  Bible 
miracles  is  their  necessity,  and  their  peculiar  adaptation  for 
the  end  proposed  of  confirming  the  truth  of  the  word  of 
God.  Observe,  in  contrast  to  real  miracles,  the  false  miracles 
professed  at  difl'erent  periods  of  the  world  to  be  worked.  If 
there  were  false  Messiahs  in  the  age  immediately  preceding 
thje  downfall  of  the  Jewish  race  and  their  dispersion  over  the 
world,  predicted  by  Christ  himself,  with  equal  truth  there 
have  been  false  miracles  to  impose  upon  the  people ;  but 
there  are  tests  always  to  discriminate  between  gold  that  is 
gold  and  gold  that  has  only  the  cqyj^earanee  of  it.  The  false 
miracles  bore  upon  the  face  of  them,  as  well  as  carried  about 
in  their  ver}-  nature,  the  clearest  proof  of  being  but  counter- 
feits. They  were  w^anting  altogether  in  the  moral  element  that 
marks  all  the  Bible  miracles.  Then  the  circumstances  under 
which  they  took  place  were  favorable  for  deception ;  then 
the  character  of  the  persons  who  professed  to  work  them 
was  such-  as  would  naturally  awaken  suspicion ;  and,  to 
crown  the  whole,  not  a  solitary  case  in  all  history  can  be 
shown,"  outside  of  the  Bible,  of  the  raising  of  the  dead,  the  walk- 
ing upon  the  waves  of  the  sea,  the  feeding  of  five  thousand 
people  upon  a  few  loaves  and  fishes,  or  making  the  winds  and 
elements  of  nature  instantly  obedient  to  a  word.  Remember, 
it  is  not  so  much  the  miracles  of  the  Bible  in  their  number 
as  in  their  significant  nature  that  shows  their  infinite  distance 


EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES.  325 

from  all  other  miracles.  Magicians,  like  the  priests  of 
Egypt,  with  their  enchantments  may  turn  their  rods  into  ser- 
pents, or  what  appear  to  be  serpents;  but  remcmhtr,  Aaron's 
rod,  that  swallowed  them  all  up,  is  the  genuine  miracle. 

Now  the  A'espasianic  wonders  Hume  speaks  of  as  "among 
the  best  attested  miracles  in  all  profane  history,"  or  that 
related  by  the  Cardinal  de  Retz,  of  a  man  recovering  his  leg 
by  the  rubbing  of  holy  oil  upon  the  stump,  or  that  of  the  cures 
effected  at  the  tomb  of  Abb^  Paris,  all  carry  with  them 
the  marks  of  base  coin.  No  miracles  except  those  of  the 
Bible  can  for  a  moment  stand  the  test  of  a  sound  and  search- 
ing criticism.  Utterly  deficient  in  the  moral  element,  they 
come  in  a  w\ay  so  unnatural,  are  witnessed,  too,  w^here  decep- 
tion is  so  easy,  and  profess  an  end  so  unworthy  of  God,  that 
the  true  miracles  appear  in  contrast  like  the  sun  at  noonday, 
making  infinitely  insignificant  the  poor  rush-lights  of  human 
pride  and  presum})tion. 

Our  first  idea  of  a  true  miracle  is,  that  while  it  comes  under 
the  supernatural,  yet  it  is  the  most  marked  and  peculiar 
action  of  the  supernatural.  It  is  just  that  agency  of  God 
that  he  makes  use  of  only  on  those  few  and  most  momentous 
occasions  where  a  necessity  exists  for  something  altogether 
different  from  any  other  mode  of  the  supernatural.  Can  any 
person  sa}^  that  in  the  government  of  God  he  may  not  see 
exigencies  where  the  interposition  of  miracle  would  be  most 
wise  and  benevolent  ?  Take  creation  :  what  law  of  nature, 
we  ask,  where  there  is  no  law  of  nature?  What  natural 
acting,  where  the  natural  does  not  exist?  We  talk  of  laws, 
and  laws  of  nature,  often  without  understanding  anything 
that  is  meant  by  laws.  In  ninety-nine  cases  in  a  hundred, 
it  is  only  convenient  phraseology  to  cover  up  our  ignorance 
of  the  whole  subject.  To  make  that  to  exist  which  never 
existed  before,  is  the  highest  exercise  of  the  supernatural, 
and  such  as  most  appropriately  we  call  miraculous.  It  is 
miraculous  in  tw^o  important  senses :  the  giving  of  a  new 
nature,  and  then  new  laws  to  that  nature.  It  means  simply 
acting  differently  from  any  previously  existing  laws  of  nature, 
and  then,  so  far  as  any  laws  that  do  exist,  in  opposition  to 


326  EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES. 

those  laws.  "When  God  makes  something  from  nothing,  or 
creates  a  new  nature,  he  is  not  restricted  to  the  dictionary 
of  an  old  nature  for  the  methods  of  his  action.  God  is  not 
so  limited  in  his  resources  that  he  can  only  help  himself  to 
something  that  formerly  existed,  and  act  exclusively  after 
those  old  processes  that  have  once  been  in  operation.  Those 
old  processes  would  not  do  in  a  new  creation,  and,  if  they 
might  do,  they  would  only  be  resorted  to  upon  the  ground 
simply  of  being  the  best  that  could  be  made  use  of 

Our  second  idea  of  miracle  is,  that  God  never  wastes 
almightiness  in  it.  Ability  to  work  and  working  are  two 
very  different  things.  There  is  no  waste  with  God.  What 
may  be  fashioned  out  of  the  old  he  takes,  and  what  cannot 
he  supplies.  The  laws  of  nature  in  existence  that  may  be 
used  he  does  thus  use,  and  to  that  which  cannot  be  used  he 
imparts  new.  Man  may  throw  away  the  crumbs  that  fall 
from  his  table,  but  God  has  some  use  for  everything.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  miraculous  will  correspond  in  its  development 
and  frequency  with  the  actual  wants  of  the  universe  and  the 
counsel  of  God  after  his  own  method  of  justice,  benevolence, 
and  wisdom. 

,  Our  third  idea  of  miracle  is,  that  it  is  introduced  just 
where  and  when  the  laws  of  nature  are  wanting,  and  is 
especially  that  form  of  the  supernatural,  and  that  recupera- 
tive energy  of  God's  action  that  exists  when  the  old  nature 
is  run  out,  or  when  a  new  nature  must  be  made.  Thus,  the 
law  of  birth  and  death  never  can  introduce  the  resurrection 
state.  The  old  nature  has  in  it  nothino;  to  brins;  about  a 
resurrection  body  ;  no  existing  law  in  nature  can  accomplish 
this.  The  resurrection  is  a  new  nature  to  the  body,  raised 
from  the  grave  w^ith  new  laws  and  new  ends  of  existence. 
This  great  miracle,  substantiated  by  the  resurrection  of 
Christ,  is  introduced  to  bring  about  that  which  never  before 
existed,  as  well  as  to  incorporate  into  the  new  body  what 
has  existed.  The  reason  for  this  miracle  lies  in  the  fact  that 
the  old  nature  is  utterly  inadequate,  by  an}^  process  of  law,  to 
produce  the  resurrection  body ;  it  is  not  only  above  the  sphere 
of  the  natural,  but  really  in  opposition  to  processes  that  exist 


EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES.  327 

in  the  natural,  so  that  miracle  comes  in,  as  in  creation,  to 
secure  a  result  that  is  not  only  divine  but  in  the  highest  degree 
transcends  all  creature  power.  Miracle  is  essential  for  two 
great  ends :  first,  the  creating  of  the  substance  of  all  things 
material  and  immaterial,  bringing  into  being  all  the  exist- 
ences outside  that  of  God  ;  and  secondly,  acting  as  the  infinite 
recuperative  energ}'  of  the  universe  in  securing  that  which 
nature  herself  is  unable  to  secure.  Much  as  we  may  admire 
that  recuperative  energy  in  nature  acting  in  accordance  with 
established  lavi^s,  by  which  injuries  are  repaired  to  the  body, 
and  the  human  system  recovers  from  the  power  of  disease, 
yet  there  is  a  sense  where  nature  itself  dies  out  and  must 
be  not  so  much  repaired  as  made  over  again  under  new  laws 
and  conditions  of  being.  Now  here  is  a  recuperative  energy, 
not  imparted  to  the  machinery  of  nature,  not  incorporated 
in  any  method  of  its  own  action,  but  above  it  and  without  it, 
where  no  second  causes  have  sway  and  where  alone  God 
works.  This  energy  is  revealed  in  creative  epochs  of  time, 
and  when  the  cyclical  ages  have  run  out. 

Our  fourth  idea  of  miracle  is,  that  it  takes  place  at  those 
periods  of  time  most  suitable  for  securing  the  great  end  of 
divine  wisdom  and  goodness,  and,  therefore,  can  be  known 
only  to  God  himself.  Our  human  reason  must  be  in  accord- 
ance with  the  laws  of  the  natural,  and  we  can  only  infer  the 
contrary  when  God  speaks  and  points  out  the  wa3\  If  it  is 
said  that  miracle,  as  defined,  implies  that  God  has  not  made 
nature  as  it  should  be  made,  and  that  it  throws  a  reflection 
upon  his  wisdom  in  not  giving  to  nature  and  its  laws  power 
to  secure  what  miracle  does,  the  reply  is,  God  never  meant 
that  nature,  even  as  the  principle  of  second  causes,  should 
do  everything  in  the  universe,  God  never  intended  that  his 
own  sovereignty  should  be  thrown  into  the  shade  by  an}^ 
action  of  natural  law. 

Our  fifth  idea  of  miracle  is,  that  while  we  may  not  be  able 
to  trace  it  to  any  natural  law,  yet  it  may,  for  aught  we  know, 
be  as  truly  under  laws  above  nature  as  those  effects  that  take 
place  through  natural  law  in  the  plane  of  nature.  Ko  person 
can  say  that  God  may  not  have  a  law  of  working  of  exact  in- 


328  EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES. 

variability,  under  like  circumstances,  as  truly  as  in  any  natural 
law ;  and  therefore,  when  miracle  is  spoken  of  as  in  viola- 
tion of  the  laws  of  nature,  or  opposition  to  them,  then  the 
one  who  thus  objects  to  miracles  must  show,  to  be  consistent, 
that  God  has  no  other  laws  but  those  in  the  line  of  nature, 
and  that  nature  itself  is  eternal;  he  must  show  that  nature 
needs  no  interposition  of  the  supernatural,  and  that  when 
God  made  any  nature  it  was  for  an  existence  without  end. 

But  we  contend  that  immortality  is  the  gift  of  God ;  it  is 
something  outside  of  nature,  and,  in  itself,  exclusively  within 
the  sphere  of  the  supernatural.  There  has  never,  apart  from 
the  word  of  God,  been  any  valid  reason  for  affirming  immor- 
tality to  mind  or  matter.  This  condition  must  be  the  result 
of  those  circumstances  and  effects  brought  about  by  a  divine 
power,  and  not  through  the  simple  influence  of  natural  law. 
We  know  that  the  soul  is  immortal,  not  because  of  its  own 
inherent  power  of  endless  life,  but  through  the  supernatural 
energy  of  God  in  securing  it  to  the  soul ;  and  we  know  the 
body,  under  certain  conditions,  to  be  also  immortal,  because 
it  is  brought  about  by  the  miraculous  energy  of  God.  When, 
then,  nature  dies  out,  when  all  the  powers  of  the  natural  fail 
to  secure  certain  results  intended  by  God,  miracle  comes  in, 
not  in  violation  of  natural  law,  for  natural  law  goes  as  far  as 
it  can  and  then  stops,  but  in  accordance  with  the  higher  law 
of  the  supernatural  after  the  purpose  of  the  Deity.  God, 
then,  has  a  place  for  miracles  in  the  universe  just  as  truly  as 
a  place  for  natural  law,  but  that  place  is  not  to  be  found  in 
nature,  but  in  a  sphere  of  activity  immeasurably  above  it.  It 
will  be  seen  that,  in  nature,  laws  that  are  of  invariable  action 
to  a  certain  extent  are  suspended,  or  other  laws  introduced,  as 
the  law  of  contraction  by  cold  or  expansion  by  heat,  operating 
with  invariable  certainty  through  the  whole  realm  of  nature; 
but  in  the  case  of  the  freezing  of  water  at  a  certain  point  the 
reverse  actually  takes  place,  and  expansion  by  cold  fol- 
lows, while  in  that  of  steam  or  vapor  a  like  deviation  from 
the  law  of  contraction  by  cold,  or  expansion  by  heat,  follows. 
jN^ow,  miracle,  to  secure  a  certain  end,  may  be  as  truly  in  ac- 
cordance with  a  law  above  nature,  having  its  activity  in  the 


EVIDENCE   OF  MIRACLES.  329 

direct  working  of  God  himself,  as  any  deviation  in  nature 
from  a  general  law.  How  can  a  person  consistently  object 
to  miracle  who  admits  creation?  How  can  one  say  that 
miracles  are  impossible,  or  improbable,  who  sees  prevailing 
through  all  nature  the  great  principle  of  birth  and  death ; 
who  cannot  show,  by  any  deduction  of  reason  or  fact  of 
science,  an  inherent  immortality  in  anything  connected  with 
the  inorganic  or  organic  kingdom  ?  How  unphilosophical 
to  speak  of  that  as  unreasonable,  because  it  takes  place 
after  no  natural  law,  but  in  a  sphere  immeasurably  above  it ! 
Because  we  know  some  laws,  is  not  the  inference  foolish  that 
we  know  all  laws  ?  If  nature,  left  to  itself,  must  fail,  is  it 
not  unwise  to  suppose  that  God  has  no  other  resources  in  re- 
serve, and  that,  in  a  way  best  known  to  him,  he  cannot  bring 
about  effects  such  as  miracles  to  show  his  own  perfect  sover- 
eignty over  nature,  and  the  infinite  ease  with  which  he  se- 
cures the  vast  ends  of  his  wisdom  and  benevolence  ? 

In  all  the  miracles  recorded  in  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment, how  true  the  words  of  Paul :  "  God  also  bearing  them 
witness,  both  with  signs  and  wonders,  and  with  divers 
miracles,  and  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  according  to  his  own 
win." 


CHAPTER   V. 

MIRACLES     OF    CHRIST. 

Were  four  separate  witnesses  to  record  facts  seen  by  them, 
the  highest  evidence  of  truth  to  ns  would  be,  with  variety  of 
language  and  diversity  in  minute  details,  an  exact  agreement 
in  every  essential  circumstance.  Precisely  the  same  have  we 
in  the  four  narratives  of  the  life  and  miracles  of  Christ. 
Their  agreement  in  every  important  particular  shows  their 
veracity,  and  their  variety  of  style  and  unimportant  discrep- 
ancies evince  that  they  had  no  collusion  between  them,  and 
that  each  narrative  is  an  independent  treatise. 

Let  us  contemplate,  in  relation  to  the  miracles  of  Christ, 
four  things : 

1.  AVhat  were  these  miracles  ? 

2.  The  age  in  which  they  were  worked. 

3.  How  Christ's  miracles  differed  from  all  other  miracles. 

4.  The  impossibilit}'  of  deception  either  in  the  Author  of 
tbese  miracles  or  those  who  recorded  them. 

Our  object  is  only  to  mention  them  in  the  order  which 
Trench,  in  his  valuable  work  on  miracles,  has  given,  while 
the  student  of  miracles  is  directed  to  this  work,  and  others 
on  the  same  subject,  in  connection  with  a  careful  perusal  of 
the  four  Evangelists,  for  a  fuller  knowledge  of  the  details 
and  the  circumstances  connected  with  their  working. 

1.  The  water  made  wine. 

2.  The  healing  of  the  nobleman's  son. 

3.  The  first  miraculous  draught  of  fishes. 

4.  The  stilling  of  the  tempest. 

5.  The  demoniacs  in  the  country  of  the  Gadarenes. 

6.  The  raising  of  Jairus's  daughter. 

7.  The  woman  with  the  issue  of  blood. 

8.  The  opening  of  the  ej-es  of  the  blind  in  the  house. 

(330)         ^  "^ 


MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST.  331 

9.  The  healing-  of  the  paralytic. 

10.  The  cleansing  of  the  leper. 

11.  The  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant. 

12.  The  demoniacs  in  the  synagogues  of  Capernaum. 

13.  The  healing  of  Simon's  wife's  mother. 

14.  The  raising  of  the  widow's  sou. 

15.  The  healing  of  the  impotent  man  at  Bethesda. 

16.  The  miraculous  feeding  of  five  thousand. 

17.  The  walking  on  the  sea. 

18.  The  opening  of  the  eyes  of  one  born  blind. 

19.  The  restoring  of  the  man  with  a  withered  hand. 

20.  The  woman  with  a  spirit  of  infirmity. 

21.  The  healing  of  a  man  with  a  dropsy. 

22.  The  cleansing  of  the  ten  lepers. 

23.  The  healing  of  the  daughter  of  the  Syrophenician 
woman. 

24.  The  healing  of  one  deaf  and  dumb. 

25.  The  miraculous  feeding  of  four  thousand. 

26.  The  opening  of  the  eyes  of  two  blind  men  at  Beth- 
saida. 

27.  The  healing  of  the  lunatic  child. 

28.  The  stater  in  the  fish's  mouth. 

29.  The  raising  of  Lazarus. 

30.  The  opening  of  the  eyes  of  two  blind  men  near 
Jericho. 

31.  The  withering  of  the  fruitless  fig-tree. 

32.  The  healing  of  Malchus's  ear. 

33.  The  second  miraculous  draught  of  fishes 

Observe,  that  while  the  circumstances  under  which  these 
miracles  were  worked  clearly  show  a  supernatural  power, 
there  were  yet  some  of  more  marked  significance  than  others, 
and  which  could  not  possibly  be  mistaken  for  anything  less 
than  a  most  wonderful  interposition  of  God,  in  showing  a 
divine  superiority  to  all  natural  law,  and  the  counteraction 
of  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  prove  the  reality  of  the  Messiahship 
of  Christ.  Remember,  the  miracles  worked  were  not  only 
for  a  most  beneficent  end,  but  absolutely  necessary  to  sub- 
stantiate the  claims  of  Christ  for  the  belief  of  all  and  the 


332  MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST. 

obedience  of  all.  The  question  before  the  Jews  was  simply, 
Is  Christ  the  true  Messiah?  Is  his  assertion  that  he  was  the 
Son  of  God,  even  as  the  Son  of  man,  in  a  peculiar  and  most 
extraordinary  sense,  founded  on  reality  and  deserving  to  be 
universally  trusted  in  ?  Now,  the  credentials  to  prove  this 
were  miracles.  If  Moses  needed  miracles  to  show  his  mis- 
sion from  God  and  impose  laws  upon  the  Jews,  much  more 
did  Christ  need  miracles  to  impose  laws  upon  the  world  and 
prove  his  Son  ship  with  the  Father.  The  mission  of  Moses 
bore  no  comparison  in  importance  to  the  mission  of  Christ. 
Moses  introduced  the  legal  dispensation,  Christ  the  Christian 
dispensation.  Moses  was  simply  human,  Christ  was  divine; 
the  one  was  set  apart  for  a  nation  only,  the  other  for  all 
nations.  Consequently,  the  significancy  of  the  mission  of 
Christ  constituted  in  itself  the  highest  reason  for  miracles. 
Without  them  the  claims  of  Christ  could  not  be  sustained. 
All  the  predictions  concerning  Christ  were  of  the  nature  to 
demand  miracles.  The  prophets  foretold  that  the  Messiah 
would  work  them ;  and,  as  the  belief  in  this  was  universal 
among  the  Jews,  miracles  constituted  in  that  age  the  strong- 
est evidence  of  the  truthfulness  of  his  mission. 

Some  of  the  miracles  of  Christ  were  of  such  a  character 
that  we  read  the  people  were  beyond  measure  astonished, 
saying,  "  He  hath  done  all  things  well."  Observe,  espe- 
ciall}^  the  miracle  of  feeding  iive  thousand  at  one  time,  and 
four  thousand  at  another,  with  a  few  loaves  and  fishes,  and 
the  baskets  full  of  fragments  taken  up  after  this  astonishing 
exhibition  of  supernatural  power.  Observe  the  walking  of 
Christ  upon  tlie  waves  of  the  sea,  the  instant  stilling  of  the 
tempest,  the  cleansing  of  the  ten  lepers,  the  opening  of  the 
eyes  of  one  born  blind,  the  raising  of  the  widow's  son,  and 
the  raising  of  Lazarus.  Consider  the  end  for  which  the 
miracles  of  Christ  were  worked,  and  the  character  of  his  in- 
structions, and  it  will  be  found  that  they  were  indispensable 
for  the  proof  of  his  divine  mission.  They  were  the  most  effi- 
cient instruments  to  prove  the  authority  of  his  instructions, 
and  to  show  to  his  disciples  that  they  were  under  a  teacher 
deserving  of  their  most  sincere  attachment  and  obedience. 


MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  333 

What,  then,  was  the  age  in  which  they  were  worked  ? 
This  age  was  the  very  period  of  the  world  most  nufavorable 
for  deception.  The  prevailing  spirit  was  formalism  and 
skepticism.  The  ruling  class  among  the  Jews  was  that  of 
the  Pharisees  and  the  Sadducees.  The  former  were  the 
bigots  of  Judea,  the  latter  the  infidels.  One  buried  up  in 
senseless  ceremonies  and  forms  the  true  religion,  the  other 
were  skeptical  of  all  religion.  One  made  void  the  law  through 
the  vain  traditions  of  the  elders,  the  other  in  practice  repu- 
diated the  law.  The  religious  convictions  of  both  classes 
never  penetrated  beneath  the  mere  shell  of  devotion,  and, 
with  but  few  exceptions,  true  piety  was  almost  unknown  in 
Judea.  Never,  perhaps,  did  infidelity,  which  denied  the 
most  fundamental  truths  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  formalism, 
which  covered  them  all  up  in  the  rubbish  of  superstition, 
abound  more  than  when  the  Son  of  God  came  to  his  own 
and  his  own  received  him  not. 

The  age  when  Christ  came  was  peculiarly  an  enlightened 
age  as  contrasted  with  preceding  ages.  Thus,  the  Son  of 
God  came  constantly  in  contact  with  the  mind  of  the  nation, 
fully  awake,  and  disposed  narrowly  to  examine  into  all  claims 
for  a  homage  and  obedience  that  professed  to  derive  their 
authority  from  God  alone.  It  will  also  be  remembered  that 
the  Jewish  nation  was  then  under  Eoman  sway.  The  Jews 
desired  nothing  so  much  as  a  king  to  throw  off  this  hateful 
bondage ;  and  the  Messiah  that  should  assert  a  spiritual 
kingship,  while  he  would  disclaim  all  worldly  power  or  inten- 
tion of  coming  in  conflict  with  a  foreign  power,  would  by 
this  awaken  most  efl:ectually  the  hostility  of  the  ruling  class 
among  the  Jews,  and  secure  only  the  enmity  or  contempt  of 
the  nation.  Now,  the  very  fact  that  Christ  declared  that 
his  kingdom  was  not  of  this  world,  and  that  he  would  have 
nothing  to  do  in  opposing  the  dominion  of  foreigners,  made  it 
a  task  a  thousandfold  more  difficult  to  convince  the  Jews  of 
his  Messiahship  and  secure  their  confidence.  Christ  placed 
himself  directly  in  opposition  to  all  the  prejudices  and  all  the 
cherished  hopes  of  the  people.  Is  it  possible  that  the  mira- 
cles of  Christ  under  a  test  so  severe  would  not  be  at  once  ex- 


334  MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST. 

posed,  if  indeed  7iot  real  ?  It  is  natural  to  admit  what  falls 
in  with  our  feelings  and  our  aspirations;  but  is  it  not  hard  to 
confess  to  the  truth  of  that  which  is  opposed  to  the  most 
loved  idols  of  the  heart?  Now,  Christ  worked  his  miracles 
under  such  conditions  that  failure  would  in  any  instance 
have  been  eagerly  seized  upon  by  his  enemies  as  an  argu- 
ment to  prove  the  falsity  of  his  claims.  Enemies  that 
ascribed  his  miracles  to  Beelzebub  because  they  were  com- 
pelled to  confess  their  truth,  would  have  infinitely  preferred 
to  have  attributed  them  to  imposture,  if  the  charge  could 
be  sustained.  Enemies  that  accused  him  of  blasphemy,  and 
constrained,  by  their  malignant  devices,  the  Roman  governor 
to  order  his  crucifixion,  would  have  felt  it  a  signal  triumph 
to  show  that  Christ  had  deceived  the  people  by  false  mir- 
acles. 

.But  it  should  be  always  borne  in  mind  that  they  uni- 
formly confessed  to  the  truth  of  his  miracles,  while  they 
attributed  them  to  the  wrong  source.  Christ  silenced  his 
deadly  foes  by  saying  that  Satan  would  not  fight  against 
himself,  or  willingly  encourage  an  enemj-  in  his  own  house 
to  destroy  his  kingdom.  But  the  all-important  fact,  as  prov- 
ing with  the  Jews  at  that  age  of  the  world  the  truthfulness 
of  Christ's  miracles,  is  seen  in  that  they  were  opposed  to 
Jesus,  not  upon  the  ground  that  he  worked  no  miracles,  but 
that  he  claimed  only  a  spiritual  dominion  and  was  not  dis- 
posed to  interfere  with  the  Roman  power.  Rather  than  sub- 
mit to  such  a  Messiah,  they  would  Avelcome  any  impostor  that 
flattered  their  national  vanity  and  professed  himself  willing 
to  deliver  them  from  a  foreign  3'Oke. 

Observe,  also,  how  Christ's  miracles  diifered  from  all  other 
miracles. 

First.  In  their  number.  Our  Saviour  worked  miracles  far 
more  numerous  than  Moses,  or  any  other  person  mentioned 
in  the  Bible.  His  miracles  were  all  crowded  into  a  period 
of  about  three  years ;  and  yet  how  were  those  three  years 
filled  up  with  a  brilliant  succession  of  mighty  works !  Most 
truly  with  the  public  ministry  of  Christ  did  there  appear  the 
epoch  of  miracles.     The  end  was  worthy  of  this  display  of 


MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST.  335 

almighty  power.  Miracles  flashed  before  the  people  with  a 
distinctuess  and  genuineness  that  could  not  be  denied. 
Friends  and  foes  were  alike  forced  to  confess  the  mighty 
deeds  of  Jesus.  Christ  challenged  investigation,  he  worked 
his  miracles  in  a  way  so  clear  and  so  convincing  that  unbe- 
lief itself  had  to  attribute  them  to  Beelzebub,  and  the  deep- 
est enmitj'  must  torture  them  into  the  working  of  Satan. 
Now,  the  miracles  of  Christ  were  so  numerous  that  finally 
the  only  alternative  left  the  Jews  was  submission  or  cruci- 
fixion. Hatred  itself  could  see  no  other  way  than  believing 
in  a  spiritual  Messiah  or  killing  him ;  but  even  this  last  re- 
sort of  wickedness  could  not  succeed  unless  every  form  of 
justice  was  made  a  mocker}-,  and  the  night  rather  than  the 
day  was  made  to  witness  their  deeds  of  darkness  and  the 
treachery  of  Judas. 

Second.  All  of  Christ's  miracles  (remarks  Trench)  were 
worked  with  the  utmost  freedom  and  ease.  "How  difierent, 
in  this  respect,  from  the  miracles  of  Moses  and  Elijah  and 
Elisha  and  others  !  Christ  speaks  but  the  word,  and  it  is  done. 
Thus  Moses  must  plead  and  struggle  with  God,  'Heal  her 
now,  O  God,  I  beseech  thee,'  ere  the  plague  of  leprosy  is  re- 
moved from  his  sister,  and  not  even  so  can  he  instantly  win 
the  blessing;  but  Christ  heals  a  leper  by  his  touch,  and  ten 
with  even  less  than  this, — merely  by  the  power  of  his  will 
and  at  a  distance.  Elijah  must  pray  long,  and  his  servant  go 
up  seven  times,  before  tokens  of  the  rain  appear;  he  also 
stretches  himself  thrice  on  the  child  and  cries  unto  the  Lord, 
and  painfully  wins  back  his  life.  And  Elisha  with  even 
more  eftbrt,  and  only  after  partial  failure,  restores  the  child 
of  the  Shunamite  to  life.  But  Christ  show^s  himself  the 
Lord  of  the  living  and  the  dead,  raising  the  dead  with  as 
much  ease  as  he  performed  the  commonest  transactions  of 
life.  Moses  show's  impatience,  but  Christ  reveals  no  imper- 
fection in  any  miracle." 

Third.  "  Where  also,"  says  Trench,  "  the  miracles  are 
similar  in  kind,  his  are  larger  and  freer  and  more  glorious. 
Elisha  feeds  a  hundred  men  with  twenty  loaves,  but  he  five 
thousand  with  five.     They  have  continually  their  instrument 


336  MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST. 

of  power  to  which  the  wonder-working  power  is  linked. 
Moses  has  his  rod,  his  statF  of  wonder,  to  divide  the  Red 
Sea  and  to  accomplish  his  other  mighty  acts,  without  which 
he  is  nothing;  his  tree  to  heal  the  bitter  waters ;  Elijah  di- 
vides the  waters  with  his  mantle ;  Elisha  heals  the  spring 
with  a  cruse  of  salt.  But  Christ  accomplishes  his  miracles 
simply  by  the  agency  of  his  word,  or  by  a  touch ;  or,  if  he 
takes  anything  as  a  channel  of  his  healing  power,  it  is  from 
himself  he  takes  it;  or  should  he,  as  once  he  does,  use  any 
foreign  medium  (John,  ix.  6),  yet  by  other  miracles  of  like 
kind,  in  which  he  has  recourse  to  no  such  extraneous  helps, 
he  declares  plainly  that  this  was  a  free  choice,  and  not  of  any 
necessity." 

Fourth.  "Wliile  their  miracles  and  those  of  the  apostles 
are  ever  done  in  the  name  of,  and  with  the  attribution  of  the 
glory  to,  another,  '  Stand  still  and  see  the  salvation  of  the 
Lord,  which  he  will  show  you;'  'In  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  of  Nazareth,  rise  up  and  walk;'  'Eneas,  Jesus  Christ 
maketh  thee  whole  ;'  his  are  ever  wrought  in  his  own  name 
and  as  in  his  own  power.  '■Iimll,\>e  thou  clean.'  'Thou 
deaf  and  dumb  spirit,  I  charge  thee  come  out  of  him.' 
'Young  man,  I  say  unto  thee,  Arise.'  Even  when  he  prays, 
being  about  to  perform  one  of  his  mighty  w^orks,  his  disci- 
ples shall  learn,  even  from  his  prayer  itself,  that  herein  he  is 
asking  for  a  power  which  he  had  not  indwelling  in  him,  but 
indeed  is  only  testifying  thus  to  the  unbroken  oneness  of  his 
life  with  his  Father's,  just  as  on  another  occasion  he  will  not 
suffer  his  disciples  to  suppose  that  it  is  for  any  but  for  their 
sakes  that  the  testimony  from  heaven  is  borne  unto  him. 
Thus  needful  was  it  for  them,  thus  needful  for  all,  that  they 
should  have  great  and  exclusive  thoughts  of  him,  and  should 
not  class  him  with  any  other,  even  the  greatest  and  the  holi- 
est of  the  children  of  men." 

Trench,  in  comparing  the  evangelical  with  other  cycles  of 
miracles,  with  great  truth  remarks : 

"  "We  do  not  find  miracles  sown  broadcast  over  the  whole 
of  the  Old  Testament  history,  but  they  all  cluster  round  a 
very  few  eminent  persons,  and  have  reference  to  certain 


MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST.  337 

great  epochs  and  crises  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Abraham, 
the  father  of  the  faithful,  David,  the  great  theocratic  king, 
Daniel,  the  '  man  greatly  beloved,'  are  alike  entirely  without 
them,  that  is,  they  do  no  miracles;  such  may  be  accomplished 
in  behalf  of  them,  but  they  themselves  accomplish  none. 
In  fact,  there  are  but  two  great  outbursts  of  these :  the  tirst, 
at  the  establishing  of  the  kingdom  under  Moses  and  Joshua, 
on  which  occasion  it  is  at  once  evident  that  they  could  not 
have  been  wanting ;  the  second,  in  the  time  of  Elijah  and 
Elisha,  and  then  also  there  was  utmost  need,  when  it  was 
a  question  whether  the  court  religion  which  the  apostate 
kings  of  Israel  had  set  up  should  not  quite  overbear  the  true 
worehip  of  Jehovah,  when  the  Levitical  priesthood  was  es- 
tablished and  the  faithful  were  but  a  scattered  few  among  the 
ten  tribes.  Then,  in  that  decisive  Bpoch  of  the  kingdom's 
history,  the  two  great  prophets — they,  too,  in  a  subordinate 
sense,  the  beginners  of  a  new  period — arose,  equipped  with 
powers  that  should  witness  that  He  whose  servants  they  were 
was  the  God  of  Israel,  however  Israel  might  refuse  to  ac- 
knowledge him.  There  is  here  in  all  this  an  entire  absence 
of  prodigality  in  the  use  of  miracles ;  thej'  are  ultimate  re- 
sources, reserved  for  the  great  needs  of  God's  kingdom,  not  its 
daily  incidents ;  they  are  not  cheap  off-hand  expedients,  which 
may  always  be  appealed  to,  but  come  only  into  play  when  no- 
thing else  would  have  supplied  their  room.  How  unlike  this 
moderation  to  the  wasteful  expenditure  of  miracles  in  the 
church  history  of  the  middle  ages  !  There  no  perplexity  can 
occur  so  trifling  that  a  miracle  will  not  l)e  brought  in  to  solve 
it;  there  is  almost  no  saint,  certainly  no  distinguished  one, 
without  his  nimbus  of  miracles  around  his  head :  they  are 
aidorned  with  these  in  rivalry  with  one  another,  in  rivalry  with 
Christ  himself;  no  acknowledgment  like  this,  'John  did  no 
miracle,'  in  any  of  the  records  of  their  lives,  finding  place." 
Trench  also  remarks:  "The  miracles  of  Scripture,  and, 
among  these,  not  so  much  the  miracles  of  the  Old  Covenant 
as  the  miracles  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  being  the  miracles 
of  that  highest  and  latest  dispensation  under  which  we  live, 
we  have  a  right  to  consider  as  normal,  in  their  chief  features 

22 


338  MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST. 

at  least,  for  all  future  miracles,  if  such  were  to  continue  in 
the  church.  The  details,  the  local  coloring,  may  be  different 
and  there  were  no  need  to  be  perplexed  at  such  a  difference 
appearing ;  yet  the  later  must  not  be  in  their  inner  spirit 
totally  unlike  the  earlier,  or  they  carry  the  sentence  of  con- 
demnation on  their  front.  They  must  not,  for  instance,  lead 
us  back  under  the  bondage  of  the  senses,  while  those  others 
were  ever  framed  to  release  from  that  bondage.  They  must 
not  be  aimless  and  objectless,  fantastic  freaks  of  power,  while 
those  had  every  one  of  them  a  meaning  and  distinct  ethical 
aim,  were  bridges  by  which  Christ  found  access  from  men's 
bodies  to  their  souls, — manifestations  of  his  glory  that  men 
might  be  drawn  to  the  glory  itself.  They  must  not  be  ludi- 
crous and  grotesque,  saintly  jests,  while  those  were  evermore 
reserved  and  solemn  and  awful ;  and  lastly,  they  must  not  be 
seals  and  witnesses  to  aught  which  the  conscience,  enlight- 
ened by  the  word  and  Spirit  of  God, — whereunto  is  the  ulti- 
mate appeal,  and  which  stands  above  the  miracle,  and  not  be- 
neath it, — protests  against  as  untrue  (the  innumerable  Romish 
miracles  which  attest  transubstantiation),  or  as  error  largely 
mingled  with  the  truth  (the  miracles  which  go  to  uphold  the 
whole  Romish  system),  those  other  having  set  their  seal  only 
to  the  absolutely  true.  Miracles  such  as  any  of  these  we  are 
bound  by  all  which  we  hold  most  sacred,  by  all  which  the 
Word  of  God  has  taught  us,  to  reject  and  to  refuse." 

Consider  the  impossibility  of  deception  either  in  the  author 
of  those  miracles,  or  those  who  recorded  them. 

How  could  Christ,  who  worked  such  miracles  as  are  re- 
corded by  the  four  evangelists,  be  either  deceived  or  deceive  ? 
Look  to  the  chain  of  evidence  to  show  the  truth.  They 
were  in  the  Old  Testament  predicted  to  take  place  under  the 
coming  Messiah  ;  they  were  worked  for  the  noblest  end  ;  they 
took  place  under  such  circumstances  as  were  most  unfavora- 
ble for  concealment ;  they  were  confessed  to  by  enemies  as 
true,  even  while  they  were  attributed  to  satanic  power. 
Christ  based  the  truth  of  his  mission  upon  them ;  he  chal- 
lenged investigation ;  he  called  for  belief  in  these  miracles 
simply  upon  the  ground  that  they  could  not   be   denied. 


MIRACLES  OF  CHRIST.  339 

At  the  trial  of  Jesus,  could  any  doubt  be  throwu  upon 
these  miracles,  the  most  would  be  made  of  it  by  his  relent- 
less foes :  but  Christ's  enemies  were  silent,  simply  because 
the  miracles  could  not  be  denied.  At  the  crucifixion  the 
chief  prie^-ts  and  Pharisees  dared  not  in  a  single  instance 
to  charge  our  Saviour  with  deception.  His  accusers  said,  re- 
vilino-  him,  "  He  saved  others,  himself  he  cannot  save." 

Observe,  also,  the  greatness  of  the  condemnation  Christ 
pronounced  against  those  who  would  not  believe  upon  him. 
Upon  what  was  this  based  ?  Upon  the  ground  that  he  per- 
formed luorks  which  no  other  man  could  do ;  and  because  his 
mission  was  fully  attested  to  by  these  works  shown  to  be  di- 
vine, therefore  all  were  inexcusable  for  unbelief  and  reject- 
ing him.  Could  there  be  any  meaning  in  this,  did  Christ 
work  no  miracles?  "Would  there  be  any  reality  in  the  de- 
nunciations of  Christ  against  unbelievers  if  there  was  no- 
thins:  miraculous  in  his  works  to  believe  in  ?  If  Christ  was 
deceived,  could  his  disciples  be  willing  to  follow  him,  confess 
him  before  the  world,  or  ever  attempt  to  convince  his  ene- 
mies of  the  truth  of  our  Saviour's  mission,  if  nothing  of 
miracle  could  be  shown  to  prove  his  claims  ?  Christ  could 
not  deceive,  for  then  he  would  cease  to  be  a  holy  example 
for  all  to  imitate  ;  neither  could  he  be  deceived,  for  then  he 
could  not  present  any  inducement  to  follow  him,  or  any  dis- 
position be  shown  upon  the  part  of  his  disciples  to  suffer 
and  die  for  him.  Besides,  Christ  came  to  introduce  the 
Christian  dispensation,  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world.  "With- 
out miracles  it  would  have  been  impossible  to  secure  the 
confidence  of  friends,  or  silence  the  malicious  charges  of 
enemies. 

To  that  generation,  when  it  was  all-important  that  mira- 
cles should  be  granted  to  prove  the  words  of  Christ,  the  ab- 
sence of  these  miracles  would  be  always  an  unanswerable 
argument  against  the  mission  itself.  Equally  obvious  is  it 
that  those  who  recorded  the  miracles  of  Jesus  could  neither 
deceive  nor  be  deceived.  Men  do  not  rush  into  torture,  dis- 
grace, death,  without  a  motive.  Human  nature  does  not 
welcome  poverty,  persecution,  contempt,  and  the  loss  of  all 


340  MIRACLES   OF  CHRIST. 

worldly  considerations,  without  a  reason.  And  the  circum- 
stances that  attended  Christ  and  his  disciples,  the  hardships 
they  voluntarily  endured,  the  extreme  privation  they  were 
subjected  to,  all  show  the  utter  impossibility  of  passing  ofi' 
any  miracle  as  true  that  was  false.  Eemember,  Christ  wished 
none  to  follow  him  who  had  no  faith  and  love  to  him ;  he 
welcomed  to  his  heart  no  disciple  who  was  not  willing  to 
take  up  his  cross  and  follow  him.  Over  and  over  again  did 
our  Saviour  disabuse  the  mind  of  his  followers  of  any  worldly 
advantage  to  be  reaped  from  the  acceptance  of  him.  He  had 
nothing  of  the  earth  to  offer  to  his  disciples,  and,  conse- 
quently, there  could  be  no  reason,  no  possible  motive,  to 
suffer  and  die  for  Christ,  unless  he  had  performed  those 
mighty  works  which  no  man  could  do,  and  which,  when  per- 
formed, afforded  evidence  irresistible  that  all  the  miracles 
recorded  were  true  and  came  from  God. 


CHAPTEE  VI. 

BIRTH,  RESURRECTION,  AND   ASCENSION   OP   CHRIST,  AND   THE 
MIRACLES    OF    HIS    APOSTLES. 

Three  great  miracles  are  connected  with  the  person  of 
Christ, — his  birth,  his  resurrection,  and  his  ascension.  The 
birth  of  our  Saviour  was  in  the  highest  sense  supernatural; 
born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  had  strictly  our 
humanity,  without  any  taint  of  original  sin  ;  he  came  into  the 
world  a  perfect  child,  even  as  he  showed  himself  afterward  a 
perfect  youth  and  man.  The  circumstances  connected  with 
the  advent  of  Christ  into  the  world  were  all  most  peculiar  and 
most  wonderful.  Christ  was  preceded,  as  foretold,  by  John 
the  Baptist,  who  proclaimed  the  mission  of  the  Redeemer  of 
man,  and  confessed  his  immeasurable  inferiorit}^  to  him. 
Angels  heralded  his  coming  with  the  song  of  the  shepherds 
keeping  their  flocks  by  night,  "  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest, 
and  on  earth  peace,  good  will  toward  men."  "Well  might 
they  by  the  angel  be  addressed  in  the  words:  '^Behold,  I 
bring  you  good  tidings  of  great  joy,  which  shall  be  to  all 
people.  For  unto  you  is  born  this  day  in  the  city  of  David 
a  Saviour,  which  is  Christ  the  Lord."  The  birthplace  of 
Christ,  the  Messiah,  was  foretold  by  Micah,  who  was  n'early 
cotemporary  with  Isaiah:  "Thou,  Bethlehem  Ephratah, 
though  thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of  Judah,  yet  out 
of  thee  shall  He  come  forth  unto  me,  who  is  to  be  ruler  in 
Israel."  Now,  all  profane  history  coincides  with  sacred  his- 
tory, in  the  accuracy  of  the  fulfillment  of  all  the  predictions 
concerning  the  circumstances  under  which  Christ  came  to 
the  world.  The  flight  of  Joseph  into  Egypt  was  owing  to 
the  murder  of  the  infants  of  Bethlehem  by  the  cruel  order 
of  Herod,  and  the  residence  of  Joseph  and  Mary  in  IsTaza- 
reth  resulted  from   the  known  cruelty  and  wickedness  of 

(341) 


342  BIRTH,  RESURRECTION,  AND 

Archelaus,  who  succeeded  his  father  in  the  rule  of  Judea.  No 
fact  in  history,  sacred  or  profane,  is  better  established  than 
the  supernatural  birth  of  Christ,  and  the  wonderful  events 
connected  with  it. 

Consider  the  great  miracle  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ. 
This  event  was  fully  confirmed  by  the  clearest  evidence. 
Thomas  had  not  oulv  the  evidence  of  sio-ht,  but  of  touch. 
Christ,  not  once,  but  often  was  seen  by  the  disciples,  and 
finally,  before  his  ascension,  he  was  seen  of  five  hundred  of 
the  brethren.  Every  precaution  had  been  used  to  secure 
death  and  prevent  Christ's  resurrection,  foretold  by  himself. 
A  Roman  soldier  had  pierced  his  side  with  a  spear,  a  guard 
was  placed  over  his  sepulcher,  his  disciples  were  few  and  de- 
spised, scattered  and  unbelieving.  They  could  neither 
credit  his  testimony  nor  be  consoled  in  view  of  his  death. 
And  3'et,  if  Christ  did  not  rise  from  the  dead,  how  happened 
it  that  Jews  and  Romans,  friends  and  enemies,  were  all  de- 
ceived ?  How  happened  it  that  the  sacred  historians  should 
fabricate  a  story  that  would  only  expose  them  to  the  con- 
tempt of  the  good  and  the  persecution  of  the  wicked;  that 
they  should  invent  a  lie  where  no  motive  existed  for  it 
and  no  possibility  appeared  of  making  it  believed  ?  Why 
should  the  chief  priests  attempt  to  bribe  the  Roman  guard  to 
circulate  the  story  that  Christ's  disciples  stole  him  away,  if 
indeed  our  Saviour  did  not  rise  from  the  grave?  Why 
should  the  disciples  proclaim  Christ  to  all  as  arisen  from  the 
grave,  unless  the  proof  of  this  mighty  miracle  was  of  such  a 
nature  as  to  be  impossible  to  be  denied  ?  The  disciples  of 
our  Lord  could  not  invent  the  story  of  Christ's  resurrection, 
if  untrue ;  for  those  who  crucified  our  Saviour  would  have 
been  glad  of  doing  the  same  to  his  followers  if  they  were 
convicted  of  falsehood  and  blasphemy;  and  certainly,  if 
honest  men,  they  were  in  no  condition  to  be  deceived.  Their 
master  had  been  subjected  to  an  ignominious  death  ;  his  grave 
was  watched  by  jealous  enemies ;  no  human  power  could 
deliver  even  the  dead  body  of  their  Lord  from  the  possession 
of  the  Roman  soldiers.  Now,  what  motive  could  exist  to 
practice  a  deception  that  ofi:ered  no  worldly  advantages,  and 


ASCENSION  OF  CHRIST,  ETC.  343 

exposed  to  certain  calamity  all  who  attempted  it?  How 
happened  it  that,  in  conhrmation  of  a  falsehood,  Peter 
should  have  boldly  charged  home  upon  the  Jews  the  cru- 
cifixion of  Christ,  and  that  three  thousand  at  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  deceived  by  an  impostor,  should  sacrifice,  with 
all  the  disciples  of  Christ,  every  earthly  good  in  confirma- 
tion of  an  untruth  ? 

Consider,  as  another  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  wonder- 
ful works  of  Christ,  the  substantial  agreement  of  the  four 
evangelists,  who  have  recorded  the  miracles  of  Christ,  and 
the  united  confirmation  in  their  favor  of  the  other  disciples. 
Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  while  there  does  exist  in  the 
four  evangelists  a  substantial  agreement  upon  essential 
facts  and  the  main  scope  of  the  subject-matter  of  thought, 
there  yet  is  embodied  in  these  narratives  of  the  life  and  doc- 
trines of  Christ  their  own  peculiar  idiosyncrasies  of  mind 
and  that  marked  individuality  which  conclusively  show 
neither  sameness  nor  servile  imitation;  and  this  very  diver- 
sity of  style,  with  unity  of  end  and  harmony  in  every  im- 
portant particular,  carries  with  it  the  highest  internal  evi- 
dence of  truth. 

The  ascension  of  our  Lord  took  place  forty  days  after  his 
resurrection  upon  the  Mount  of  Olives,  about  two  miles  from 
Jerusalem.  Xow,  this  great  event  is  shown  true  by  the  tes- 
timony of  witnesses  who  could  not  have  been  deceived.  As 
an  indisputable:  fact,  it  is  recorded  by  the  lour  evangelists ; 
it  accorded  also  with  the  predictions  of  Christ,  and  was  made 
necessary  by  the  supernatural  character  of  his  mission  and 
the  nature  of  all  his  instructions  to  his  disciples.  It  was  not 
only  essential  for  the  success  of  Christianity  that  Christ 
should  rise  from  the  dead,  but  that  he  should,  after  confer- 
ring the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  his  followers,  return 
bodily  to  his  Father  in  heaven.  Christ  having  made  an 
atonement  for  the  sins  of  the  world,  it  became  him  to  show 
not  only  his  triumph  over  the  grave,  but  the  glory  of  his 
spiritual  reign,  by  returning  unto  that  home  of  infinite 
blessedness  from  which  he  came  to  redeem  lost  man. 

The  miraculous  character  of  the  birth,  resurrection,  and 


344  BIRTH,  RESURRECTION,  AND 

ascension  of  Christ  was  in  perfect  harmony  not  only  with 
the  predictions  of  the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  but 
with  the  character  of  his  instructions  and  the  nature  of  his 
mission  in  this  world.  As  the  Son  of  God,  coming  for  the 
specific  end  of  the  redemption  of  sinners,  it  would  have  been 
impossible  to  secure  that  end  without  the  threefold  miracle 
of  his  birth,  resurrection,  and  ascension.  The  visible  king- 
ship of  Christ,  at  his  first  advent,  would  have  conflicted  with 
his  spiritual  reign  in  the  hearts  of  his  followers ;  and  there- 
fore it  was  essential  that  Christ  should,  after  attaining  unto 
the  end  of  his  mission,  return  unto  his  Father.  Eemember, 
also,  that  so  indispensable  especially  was  the  resurrection  of 
our  Lord,  that  he  based  upon  it  the  whole  success  of  his  re- 
ligion in  the  world,  and  the  disciples  made  the  fact  of  Christ 
rising  from  the  dead  the  all-conclusive  argument  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  boldly  challenged  the  severest  investigation  to 
disprove  it.  This  alone  encouraged  them  and  confirmed 
their  faith  upon  an  immovable  foundation.  With  the  cer- 
tainty of  this  truth  ever  present  in  their  minds,  they  did  not 
hesitate  to  come  into  conflict  with  the  enemies  of  the  Re- 
deemer, and  convict  them  in  their  unbelief  of  a  sin  as  unreas- 
onable as  it  was  pernicious  to  all  their  interests  for  time  and 
eternity.  Now,  could  the  disciples  of  Christ  have  dared  to 
attempt  to  palm  oft"  an  imposition  upon  the  world,  when  the 
whole  world,  spiritually,  was  in  arms  against  Christianity,  and 
would  cheerfully  crush  it  unless  based  upow  truth  that  no 
sophistry  could  gainsay,  nor  ingenuity  deny  ? 

Consider  the  miracles  worked  by  the  apostles  after  the 
death  and  the  ascension  of  Christ  into  the  heavens.  Those 
miracles  took  place  under  circumstances  where  deception 
was  impossible.  As  one  instance,  take  the  case  of  the  lame 
man  from  his  birth  instantly  healed  by  Peter ;  he  was  known 
by  all  the  Jews  who  resorted  to  the  temple ;  he  sat  at  the 
gate  called  Beautiful.  There,  before  a  great  concourse  of 
people,  before  enemies  who  would  not  be  deceived,  this  lame 
man,  at  a  word,  immediately  received  strength  in  his  feet 
and  ankle-bones,  and,  leaping  up,  stood,  and  walked,  praising 
God. 


ASCENSION  OF  CHRIST,  ETC.  345 

The  priests  of  the  temple  and  the  Sadducees,  grieved  that 
Christ  and  his  resurrection  should  be  taught,  hiid  hold  upon 
Peter  and  John  and  put  them  in  confinement.  But  mark 
the  result  of  that, miracle  in  confirmation  of  tlie  divine  mis- 
sion of  the  Sou  of  God.  Five  thousand  believed  upon  the 
apostles,  and  those  captious  euemies  who  saw  the  boldness  of 
Peter  and  John,  and  the  man  which  was  healed  standing  with 
them,  could  not  say  anything  against  it,  and,  in  their  con- 
fusion, exclaimed,  "  What  shall  we  do  to  these  men  ?  for 
that  indeed  a  notable  miracle  hath  been  done  by  them 
is  manifest  to  all  them  that  dwell  in  Jerusalem,  and  we 
cannot  deny  it."  Can  any  have  the  credality  to  believe 
that  when  Judaism  was  tottering  on  its  throne,  when  a  long- 
standing hierarchy  was  endangered,  when  temple  and  priest 
and  the  whole  system  of  Mosaic  ritualism,  venerable  for  ages 
of  growth,  shook  like  an  aspen-leaf  before  a  few  obscure,  un- 
learned men,  destitute  alike  of  power,  wealth,  and  honor, 
that  imposture  could  have  been  palmed  ofi:'?  If  the  miracles 
professed  to  be  worked  were  false,  the  disciples  gained 
nothing  but  the  contempt  of  all  good  persons  and  the  cer- 
tain triumph  of  their  opponents.  There  was  too  much  at 
stake  to  imagine  even  a  chailce  for  imposture. 

Consider,  also,  that  not  two  nor  three  great  miracles  were 
professed  to  be  worked  in  confirmation  of  Christianity,  but 
many,  upon  various  occasions,  and  where  the  greatest  pub- 
licity was  courted ;  miracles,  too,  when  the  religion  of  Christ 
was  in  its  infancy,  when  the  wealth,  power,  learning,  and 
influence  of  the  state  were  arrayed  against  it;  miracles  so 
numerous,  under  such  a  combination  of  circumstances,  that 
one  failure  clearly  proved  would  discredit  the  w^hole;  where 
the  chance  for  deception  was  not  as  one  to  a  million ;  where 
no  occasional  success  would  do,  but  uniform,  uninterrupted 
triumph  in  all  cases  was  essential  to  secure  confidence  and 
belief.  Consider  that  converts  from  the  ranks  of  enemies 
were  secured  in  vast  multitudes,  of  every  rank  and  profession 
of  life,  among  Jews  and  Gentiles ;  converts  who  sacrificed 
riches  and  honors,  security,  and  all  pleasures  held  dear  by 
the  world,  for  a  conviction  of  the  mind  that  no  misfortune 


346  BIRTH,  RESURRECTION,  AND 

could  shake,  and  no  enmity  master.  Kovv,  this  is  a  fact 
borne  out  by  history,  sacred  and  profane.  Josephus,  Tacitus, 
Julian,  Celsus,  and  Porpliyry,  not  friends  only,  but  enemies, 
coutirm  this  fact.  And  then,  upon  the  side  of  friends,  not 
the  writers  of  the  Bible  only,  but  the  apostolic  fathers,  Bar- 
nabas, Clement,  Hermes,  Ignatius,  and  Poly  carp, — the  leaders 
of  the  Christian  Church,  and  historians  after  the  age  of  the 
apostles, — Justin  Martyr,  Irenteus,  Tertullian,  the  two 
Gregories,  and  Jerome,  all  coniirm  the  indisputable  fact  of 
the  greatness  anel  the  number  of  the  miracles  of  theiTew  Tes- 
tiiment.  The  Jews,  in  every  age,  preserved  with  sedulous 
care  the  Old  Testament ;  the  miracles  of  that  are  not  only 
universally  acknowledged  by  the  Jews  themselves  in  every 
age,  but  are  confessed  true  by  Christ  and  the  apostles,  i^o 
such  mass  of  testimony  exists  for  other  historic  facts.  The 
truth  that  Caesar  composed  his  Commentaries,  or  Alexander 
fought  his  battles,  rests  not  upon  a  hundredth  part  of  the  tes- 
timony that  the  miracles  of  revelation  do;  and  yet  who 
doubts  that  Ctesar  or  Alexander  once  lived,  or  fought  the 
battles  recorded  ? 

But,  as  an  additional  evidence  of  the  miracles  of  Christ 
and  his  apostles,  consider  that  no  possible  motive  could  exist 
for  deception.  A  man  must  have  a  motive  for  lying;  but 
what  motive  for  lying  could  exist  with  the  writers  of  the 
Bible? 

Truth,  when  persecuted,  when,  like  a  hunted,  forlorn  out- 
cast, it  walks  upon  thorns,  dwells  in  the  caverns  of  the  earth, 
lives  where  the  world's  honors,  riches,  and  pleasures  die  out, — 
truth  that  is  gibbeted,  burnt  at  the  stake,  devoured  b}'  the 
lions  of  a  Roman  amphitheater, — truth  crucihed,  hated,  de- 
spised, and  tormented  in  the  family  and  the  state,  made  igno- 
minious and  painful, — truth  sitting  in  sackcloth  and  ashes,  is 
not  avowed,  loved,  believed  in  by  thousands,  unless  it  be 
truth.  If  the  disciples  of  Christ  did  not  work  miracles,  the^^ 
neither  could  nor  would  profess  them  ;  and  if  their  reality  was 
not  confirmed  by  testimonj-  that  could  not  be  denied,  then 
thousands  would  not  have  sacrificed  everything  for  decep- 
tion,— deception  that   conferred  neither  pleasure,  honor,  nor 


ASCENSIOX  OP  CHRIST,  ETC.  347 

wealth, — deception  that  subjected  to  ever}'  outward  calamity 
aud  the  upbraidiugs  of  au  abused  nature  and  perjured  con- 
science. A  story  like  this  demands  the  greatest  conceivable 
credulity,  and  involves  itself  a  greater  miracle  than  all  the 
miracles  of  the  Bible  together.  If,  after  a  consideration  of 
the  circumstances  connected  with  the  miracles  of  Christ  and 
the  apostles,  they  are  not  to  be  credited,  then  it  is  impossible 
to  imagine  any  fact  of  history  worthy  of  belief. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

MIRACLES    OF    MOSES. 

With  the  patriarchal  dispensation  and  the  calling  of  Abra- 
ham, more  than  nineteen  hundred  years  before  the  coming 
of  Christ,  there  was  made  known  the  distinct  separation  of 
a  nation,  the  lineal  descendants  of  Abraham,  who  should  be 
the  chosen  depositaries  of  the  gospel,  and  of  whom,  as  con- 
cerning the  flesh,  Christ  should  come.  The  promise  that  in 
Abraham,  as  the  father  of  the  faithful,  the  nations  of  the 
earth  should  be  blessed,  was  more  particularly  manifested 
Avhen  Christ  our  Saviour  appeared;  but  in ■  another  sense 
was  the  world  benefited  by  the  selection  of  a  distinct  race 
to  be  the  especial  objects  of  the  divine  protection  and  love. 
The  world,  at  the  calling  of  Abraham,  had  greatly  relapsed 
into  idolatry.  To  preserve  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God, 
it  was  necessary  that  one  nation  should  be  set  apart  for  the 
express  object  of  maintaining  a  knowledge  of  the  unity  of 
the  true  God.  Consequently,  we  find  the  selection  of  the 
Jews,  who  were  to  be  distinguished  as  the  keepers  of  the 
sacred  oracles,  and  for  whom  a  succession  of  wonders  were 
to  be  worked  to  preserve  them  from  being  altogether  de- 
stroyed by  the  idolatrous  nations  by  which  they  were  sur- 
rounded. During  the  years  that  elapsed  from  the  calling  of 
Abraham  to  the  exodus  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt,  we  have 
made  known  the  increasing  wickedness  of  the  Canaanites, 
who  were  the  original  inhabitants  of  Palestine.  It  was  when 
the  cup  of  their  iniquity  Avas  full,  after  an  existence  of  more 
than  four  hundred  years  before  the  calling  of  Abraham,  that 
we  have  made  known  to  us  the  wonders  in  the  land  of  Egypt. 
Let  us,  then,  consider  the  miracles  of  Moses  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  see  if  in  any  way  they  can  be  made  to  appear  the 
(348) 


MIRACLES  OF  MOSES.  349 

work  alone  of  human  power.  Let  us  consider  the  circum- 
stances of  the  Israelites  and  the  peculiar  relation  they  sus- 
tained to  the  Egyptians,  and  see  if  any  other  than  a  divine 
power,  miraculously  put  forth,  could  account  for  the  deliver- 
ance of  the  oppressed  Israelites. 

As  soon  as  Pharaoh,  who  befriended  Joseph  and  his  breth- 
ren, was  dead,  there  arose  in  Egypt  a  race  of  kings  who 
looked  with  jealousy  upon  the  strangers  in  their  midst ;  they 
viewed  with  fear  and  envy  their  rapid  increase,  and  began  to 
devise  ways  by  which  they  might  be  brought  wholly  under 
their  power.  To  destroy  them  would  be  to  lose  their  useful 
services  as  slaves ;  to  let  them  continue  in  their  natural  in- 
crease would  be  making  them  too  formidable  for  their  inter- 
ests. The  only  course  that  presented  itself  as  adapted  to 
their  end  was  to  keep  them  in  abject  bondage,  and  to  slay 
their  male  children.  Thus  their  hardships,  with  their  growth 
as  a  nation,  increased,  and  what  slavery  could  not  do,  Pha- 
raoh sought  to  accomplish  by  infanticide.  But  in  the  darkest 
day  of  their  adversity  God  raised  up  for  them  in  the  house 
of  Pharaoh  a  deliverer.  Moses,  so  called  because  saved  from 
the  water,  was  appointed  by  God  to  secure  the  independence 
of  his  nation.  At  the  age  of  eighty  years  he  commenced 
that  series  of  wonders  that  has  made  memorable  to  all  suc- 
ceeding time  the  land  of  Egypt.  But  consider  the  circum- 
stances under  which  the  ten  plagues  were  sent  upon  Egypt, 
and  the  end  for  which  they  were  sent. 

The  Egyptians  were  sunk  into  the  deepest  idolatry ;  they 
worshiped  not  only  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  but  birds,  rep- 
tiles, and  brute  animals.  To  suppose  that  the  Israelites  were 
not  contaminated  by  the  example  of  their  masters  is  to  con- 
tradict their  subsequent  history  in  the  desert,  and  their  known 
inclination  to  worship  idols.  In  Egypt,  with  the  vices  of 
slaves  they  had  all  the  fear  of  slaves.  Every  manly  and  noble 
impulse  seemed  to  be  crushed  under  that  iron  bondage  which 
befell  them.  Doomed  to  the  thankless  task  of  brickmaking, 
unrewarded  for  the  severest  toil,  their  male  offspring  mur- 
dered, all  national  hope,  all  energy,  seemed  to  have  expired. 
They  distrust  their  deliverer,  Moses;  they  upbraid  him  when 


350  MIRACLES   OF  MOSES. 

doing  the  best  service  for  them,  and  alike  in  their  actions 
and  their  whole  deportment  they  appear  to  be  only  degraded 
slaves.  To  effect  simply  a  deliverance  from  bondage  to  the 
Israelites  was  but  a  small  part  of  the  task  of  Moses.  It  was 
to  educate  them  to  a  better  religion,  to  impress  upon  their 
minds  the  one  true  God,  to  deliver  them  from  the  idolatry 
even  more  than  the  slavery  of  the  Egyptians, — this  was  the 
great  task  to  be  performed.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Egyp- 
tians were  proud  in  their  oppression  ;  they  were  given  up  to 
the  most  cruel  despotisi^i  even  as  the  most  debasing  idolatry. 
Neither  king  nor  nation  would  of  their  own  accord  emancipate 
the  Jews.  Here,  then,  we  see  a  twofold  end  to  be  attained 
unto  by  miracle,  even  deliverance  from  bondage  and  the 
counteraction  of  idolatry,  under  circumstances  that  would 
clearly  show  the  supremacy  of  the  God  of  the  Jews.  Conse- 
quently, we  see  that  the  known  instrumentality  selected  for 
the  Jews  was  such  as  to  preclude  the  idea  that  the  work  per- 
formed was  of  man  and  not  of  God.  Not  only  was  the  end 
proposed  for  miracles  most  suitable,  and  worthy  of  God,  but 
such  as  could  not  be  attained  unto  by  any  human  power.  No 
human  power  could  save  the  Israelites  or  conquer  the  Egyp- 
tians, in  the  peculiar  circumstances  in  which  they  were  placed. 
No  human  power  was  able  to  conduct  through  the  desert  the 
Israelites,  and  from  the  debasement  of  slaves  to  make  them 
a  free  and  powerful  nation.  If  Moses  could,  unaided  by  the 
direct  power  of  God,  have  guided  the  Jews  to  the  promised 
land,  with  no  miracles  as  the  credentials  of  his  authority,  he 
yet  could  not  without  miracles  have  made  the  Jews  acknowl- 
edge the  unity  of  God  and  his  infinite  superiority  to  the 
gods  of  the  Egyptians.  It  was  not  simply  to  deliver  the  Jews 
from  civil  bondage,  but  to  educate  them  as  the  chosen  people 
of  God, — that  was  the  end  to  be  secured.  Thus  we  see  a 
double  occasion  for  the  Mosaic  miracles.  First,  the  necessity 
of  the  miraculous  interposition  of  God,  to  secure  for  the 
Jews,  in  their  low  condition,  political  freedom,  and  then  the 
necessity,  equally  great,  to  emancipate  the  Jews  from  Egyp- 
tian idolatry.  Now,  all  the  means  adopted  to  deliver  the  Is- 
raelites were  designed  to  impress  upon  their  minds  the  infi- 


MIRACLES  OF  MOSES.  351 

nite  superiority  of  the  one  God  to  the  polytheism  of  the 
heathen.  The  Jews  were  to  be  set  apart  from  all  nations  as 
the  peculiar  people  of  God,  and  to  be  made  a  standing  monu- 
ment to  the  nations  of  the  earth  of  the  superiority  of  God  to 
all  idols.  Does  not  the  whole  history  of  the  wonderful  pres- 
ervation of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,  and  their  more  wonderful 
deliverance,  show  that  this  was  the  end  to  be  secured  ?  So 
far  from  the  improbability  of  miracles  professed  to  be  worked 
by  Moses,  it  is  impossible  to  account  for  the  preservation  of 
the  Jews,  and  their  subsequent  possession  of  Canaan,  without 
a  miraculous  interposition  of  God.  What  more  improbable, 
if  Moses  worked  no  miracles,  than  that  a  whole  nation,  con- 
sisting of  more  than  three  millions,  could  be  induced,  in  oppo- 
sition to  a  powerful  enem}^,  to  leave  Egypt  ?  But  this  im- 
probability is  augmented  a  thousandfold  when  we  consider 
the  forty  years'  wanderings  of  the  Jews  in  the  desert.  That 
three  millions  could  subsist  a  year  in  the  desert,  or  be  induced 
to  stay  half  that  time  as  wanderers  over  the  desolate  land 
of  Arabia,  is  an  impossibilit}'  in  itself,  without  a  miraculous 
interposition  of  God.  But  not  only  were  miracles  necessary 
to  deliver  the  Jews,  but  without  them  neither  Pharaoh  nor 
the  Jews  could  be  convinced  of  the  divine  mission  of  Moses. 
Moses  was  a  fugitive  from  Pharaoh's  court,  a  friendless  out- 
cast from  the  honors  and  emoluments  of  power;  he  had 
nothing  in  himself  to  deliver  the  Jews.  He  was  no  less  an 
object  of  aversion  to  the  Egyptians  than  of  suspicion  to  his 
brethren.  "Without  riches,  fame,  or  military  strength,  his 
very  proposition  to  deliver  from  bondage  the  Jews,  without 
miracles,  was  the  most  visionary  imaginable.  But,  more  than 
this,  Pharaoh  was  not  to  be  persuaded  to  let  the  Israelites  go 
without  miracles.  Even  when  he  did  let  them  go,  after  the 
most  majestic  tokens  of  divine  power,  it  was  extorted  from 
his  fears,  and  not  from  his  love.  His  heart  clung  to  his  idols. 
How,  without  a  miraculous  interposition,  was  Pharaoh  to  be 
compelled  to  let  the  Israelites  go  ?  Consider  the  great  inter- 
ests at  stake  demanding  miracles.  If  ever  there  was  an  occa- 
sion for  their  use,  certainly  the  introduction  of  the  Mosaic 
or  legal  dispensation  was  one.     The  patriarchal  state  was  to 


352  MIRACLES  OF  MOSES. 

be  succeeded  by  a  higher  development  of  the  divine  mercy 
to  mankind.  The  promise  to  Abraham  was  to  be  fulfilled  in 
the  gathering  together  of  a  nation,  free  and  powerful,  in  the 
predicted  land  of  Canaan.  Consequently,  as  preparatory  to 
the  coming  of  Christ,  the  unity  of  God,  and  the  nature  of 
his  law,  and  the  necessity  of  an  atonement  for  sin,  were  to  be 
revealed  in  a  far  more  impressive  way  than  ever  before.  If 
the  calling  of  Abraham  was  attended  with  miracles,  more 
truly  the  ushering  in  of  the  law  of  Sinai,  and  the  political 
and  moral  elevation  of  a  whole  nation,  under  the  most  de- 
pressed circumstances,  demanded  the  interposition  of  God. 

Let  us,  then,  consider  the  ten  plagues  of  Egypt  and  the 
subsequent  miracles  of  Moses.  They  come  to  us  as  facts  re- 
vealed in  the  Bible  and  confirmed  by  the  light  that  profane 
history  throws  upon  that  age.  Miracles  are  events  so  ex- 
traordinary as  to  forbid  the  supposition  of  the  operation  of 
natural  law.  They  come  as  events  marking  the  supernatural 
working  of  God.  Consequently,  they  are  the  credentials  of 
God,  to  show  that  he  works,  and  that  he  is  to  be  believed  in. 
In  order  to  convince  Pharaoh,  or  the  Jews,  Moses  must  work 
miracles.  He  goes  to  Pharaoh  with  the  demand  to  let  Israel 
go.  What  was  the  natural  course,  under  these  circumstances, 
for  Pharaoh  to  pursue  ?  Evidently,  to  question  the  authority 
of  Moses  for  making  a  request  so  extraordinary;  and  thus  he 
did.  "  And  Pharaoh  said.  Who  is  Jehovah,  that  I  should 
obey  his  voice  ?  I  know  not  Jehovah,  neither  will  I  let  Israel 
go."  Again  Moses  is  sent  to  repeat  the  command.  The 
king  refuses,  upon  their  want  of  authority,  and  demands  a 
miracle  as  the  evidence.  A  miracle  is  wrought, — Aaron 
throws  down  his  staff,  and  it  becomes  a  serpent,  i^ow,  what- 
ever may  have  been  the  enchantments  of  the  Egyptian  priests, 
it  is  certain  that  they  performed  by  their  magic  wonders,  in- 
ferior, it  may  be,  to  those  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  but  of  such 
a  nature  as  to  give  a  plausible  objection  to  the  refusal  of  the 
king  to  let  the  Israelites  go.  We  pretend  not  to  say  whether 
the  legerdemain  of  the  magicians  of  Pharaoh  was  miraculous 
or  not,  but  my  argument  for  miracles  of  the  most  unques- 
tionable nature  is  but  the  more  confirmed  when  the  preju- 


MIRACLES   OF  MOSES.  353 

diced  mind  of  the  king,  shielding  himself  by  the  magic  of 
his  priests,  arrogantly  gave  Moses  and  Aaron  to  understand 
that  his  men  could  work  as  o-ood  miracles,  if  not  as  o:reat,  as 
themselves,  and,  consequently,  his  authority  was  as  good  as 
theirs.  Henceforth  God  commissioned  Aaron  and  Moses  to 
work  other  miracles.  The  Nile  is  turned  into  blood,  and  the 
frogs  cover  the  land.  The  magicians,  upon  an  inferior  scale, 
to  the  mind  of  the  king  apparently  effect  the  same  wonders. 
Thus,  in  the  trial  between  God  and  the  gods  of  Pharaoh,  the 
result  thus  far  had  been  only  to  the  king  the  acknowledgment 
that  Moses  was  the  superior  magician.  Now  miracles  were  to 
be  worked,  so  peculiar  and  so  wonderful  as  to  compel  Pharaoh 
and  his  priests  to  give  up  in  despair,  and  confess  the  divine 
authority  of  the  mission  of  Moses.  Commencing  with  the 
mildest  form  of  miracle,  there  was  to  flash  before  the  mind 
a  far  higher  indication  of  the  power  of  God.  The  plague  of 
lice  conies,  a  miracle  of  creation  ;  the  magicians  renew  their 
efforts,  but  altogether  fail  in  imitating  it.  Pharaoh,  now 
stripped  of  every  apology,  fiercely  intrenches  himself  in  the 
stubbornness  of  his  heart,  and  refuses  to  let  the  people  go. 
Then  comes  the  swarm  of  flies;  then  the  plague  of  boils  and 
blains;  then  the  plague  of  hail;  then  of  locusts,  which  de- 
vour all  the  green  herbage  of  Egypt;  then  of  the  three  days' 
darkness;  then  of  the  more  fearful  visitation  of  the  death  of 
the  flrst-born  ;  and,  finall}',  this  increasing  series  of  divine 
visitations  of  wrath  upon  a  godless  king  and  nation  is  con- 
summated in  the  drowning  of  Pharaoh  and  the  Egyptians  in 
the  Red  Sea. 

The  circumstances  in  which  the  Israelites  were  placed,  pre- 
vious to  this  fearful  destruction  of  the  Egyptians,  were  most 
extraordinar}'.  Skeptics  have  solaced  themselves  with  the 
idea  that  the  Israelites  might  have  passed  over  a  branch  of 
the  Red  Sea,  at  the  northern  extremity,  as  being  only  an 
estuary  at  low  tide.  But  what  the  Israelites  might  have 
done  is  quite  diflerent  from  the  actua.l  course  they  were  re- 
quired to  take.  The  great  design  of  the  series  of  the  Mosaic 
miracles  was  to  convince  the  Jews  of  the  unity  and  absolute 
supremacy  of  the  God  of  Abraham  above  all  the  gods  of 

23 


354  MIRACLES   OF  3I0SES. 

Egypt.     Consequently,  upon  a  scale  the  most  magnificent, 
we  read  of  tliat  series  of  wonders  that  were  to  prepare  the 
way  for  the  emancipation  of  tlie  whole  nation  from  civil  and 
religious  bondage.    The  end  was  worthy  of  the  means.    The 
design  was  such  only  as  God  could  conceive  of  and  omnis- 
cience execute.     True  religion,  the   knowledge  of  the  one 
infinite  and  glorious  God,  had  nearly  expired  from  the  earth. 
In  what  better  way,  then,  than  that  revealed  in  the  Bible, 
was  there  to  be  a  counteraction  of  an  evil  so  universal  and 
so  threatening  ?  But  there  was  another  design  in  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Egyptians  in  the  Red  Sea,  of  vast  importance. 
All  the  other  miracles  worked  in  Egypt  had  awed,  but  not 
subdued,  the  avaricious  spirit  of  the  Egyptians.    The  march- 
ing forth  of  the  vast  multitude  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt 
had  been  extorted  from  the  fears  and  not  the  willing  consent 
of  either  king  or  people.     Consequently,  a  feeble,  enslaved 
army,   encumbered   with    women    and   children,  wandering 
within  a  few  days'  march  from  Egypt,  would  be,  sooner  or 
later,  a  prey  to  the  incensed  Egyptians.    Some  decisive  blow 
was  to  be  struck,  so  great  and  so  powerful  as  that  henceforth 
the  timorous  hearts  of  the  Israelites  would  have  nothing  to 
fear  from  their  old  oppressors.     This  was  the  primary  object 
of  the    miracle  of  the  Red    Sea,  expressly  declared   in  the 
inspired  word:  "I  will  be  honored  upon  Pharaoh  and  all 
liis  hosts,  that  the  Egyptians  may  know  that  I  am  the  Lord." 
Instead,  therefore,  of  the  Israelites  taking  the  main  road, 
the  open  route  at  the  head  of  the  Red  Sea,  leading  into  the 
desert,  they  are  ordered  to  march  down  the  shore  to  the 
south,  by  a  route  which  could  lead  them  only  into  the  heart 
of  Africa,  and  in  defiles  so  bad  as  that,  if  pursued,  they  could 
neither  fight  nor  fly.  Never  were  the  wise  taken  in  their  own 
craftiness  more  effectually  than  Pharaoh  and  his  host.    Reas- 
oning upon  all  human  calculation,  victory  was  both  certain 
and  easy  for  the  Egyptians.      Pharaoh   pursued   after   his 
slaves,  and  soon  reached  their  encampment.  On  one  side  was 
the  desert,  upon  the  other  the  Red  Sea,  and  directly  in  their 
rear,  shutting  out  all  possibility  of  escape,  were  the  mighty 
forces  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  with  their  chariots  of   war. 


MIRACLES  OF  MOSES.  355 

Under  what  circumstances  could  a  miracle  be  more  uecessary, 
or  impress  the  mind  with  a  deeper  conviction  of  the  superi- 
ority of  Jehovah  to  the  false  gods  of  Egypt?  Unless  God 
interposed,  all  was  lost.  With  a  bitter  taunt  the  Israelites 
(.■ry  out  against  their  leader,  "  Were  there  no  graves  in  Egypt, 
that  thou  hast  taken  us  away  to  die  in  the. wilderness  ?" 

God  now  commands  Moses  to  stretch  out  his  rod  over  the 
Red  Sea,  "that  the  Israelites  may  pass  on  dry  ground." 
The  Egyptians  follow  in  after  them.  When  the  morning 
watch  is  come,  the  Israelites  reach  the  shore,  and  the  whole 
body  of  the  Egyptians  are  in  the  sea-bed.  What  a  spectacle 
now  presents  itself  of  awful  grandeur ! 

Over  the  sea-sand  the  enemy's  chariots  drive  heavilj'.  At 
last  the}'  evy  out,  "  The  Lord  fighteth  for  Israel."  The  com- 
mand is  given,  "And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Stretch  out 
thine  hand  over  the  sea,  that  the  waters  may  come  again  upon 
the  Egj'ptians."  The  destruction  was  total.  "  There  re- 
mained not  so  much  as  one  of  them." 

We  will  not  dwell  upon  the  other  miracles  of  Moses.  For 
wise  reasons  the  Israelites  were  condemned  to  wander  forty 
years  in  the  desert.  But  for  a  multitude  so  great  to  subsist 
in  the  desert  so  long,  miracles  constant  and  vast  were  abso- 
lutely necessary-.  But  the  end  was  worthy  of  the  means.  The 
desert  was  to  be  the  school  of  religion  and  good  discipline  for 
the  Israelites.  Here  was  the  law  of  Sinai  to  be  given,  with  its 
majestic  glory.  Here  was  to  be  the  pillar  of  cloud  by 
day,  and  the  pillar  of  fire  by  night.  Here  the  consecrated 
priests  were  to  bear  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  where  abode 
the  awful  Shechinah.  Here  manna  daily  was  to  come  down 
from  heaven,  except  upon  the  holy  Sabbath.  Here  waters 
from  the  rock  were  to  flow  to  quench  the  thirst  of  the 
multitude.  All  was  one  vast  series  of  miracles  such  as 
man  never  yet  had  seen,  for  one  great  end,  the  preservation 
of  true  religion.  For  this  object  a  nation  was  selected  and 
surrounded  with  all*  the  tokens  of  an  ever-present  God. 
For  this  object  the  rigid  discipline  of  forty  years  was  en- 
forced to  wean  the  Israelites  from  the  idols  of  the  heathen. 
A  new  dispensation  was  to  be  ushered  in,  amid    the  fires 


356  MIRACLES  OF  310SES. 

of  Sinai  and  its  dread  thunders.  The  end  was  such  that 
nothing  but  miracle  could  secure  it.  God  was  to  be  every- 
thing, man  nothing.  Human  instrumentality  was  to  be  for- 
gotten before  the  steady  blaze  of  divine  agency.  ISTow,  such 
are  revealed  facts :  of  their  philosophy  we  know  nothing. 
But  one  thing  is  certain  :  the  Israelites  never  could  have  been 
delivered  from  Egypt,  never  preserved  in  the  desert,  they 
neither  would  nor  could  have  received  Moses  as  their  leader, 
or  submitted  to  the  law  of  Sinai,  or  conformed  to  the  cere- 
monial ritual,  or  acknowledged  as  divine  the  Pentateuch, 
or  confessed  in  every  age  that  the  mission  of  Moses  was 
from  God,  had  not  the  miracles  recorded  been  worked. 


CHAPTER    VIIL 

EVIDENCE    OF    PROPHECY. 

Prophecy  is  the  history  of  the  future ;  it  is  the  exercise  of 
a  foresight  into  events  jet  to  come,  such  only  as  omniscience 
is  capable  of.  Human  beings  have  often  attempted  to  pry 
into  the  future,  and  to  pronounce  with  confidence  upon  events 
yet  to  take  place.  The  heathen  have  had  their  oracles.  The 
most  renowned  nations  of  antiquity  have  been  influenced  to 
place  confidence  in  the  auguries  of  soothsayers,  or  the  famed 
responses  of  Delphi  or  Dodona.  The  restless  curiosity  of 
man  has  often  attempted  to  unveil  the  secrets  of  futurity  and 
fathom  the  deep  purposes  of  God.  To  a  certain  extent,  some 
knowledge  of  the  future  may  be  reached  by  an  uninspired 
man.  When  some  law  of  the  mental  or  phj'sical  world  is 
understood,  it  can  be  found  out  from  its  known  results  what 
in  the  future  will  be  its  operation.  The  mind  of  man  may 
attain  unto  some  knowledge  of  futurity  by  the  experience  of 
the  past.  But  this  knowledge  is  only  of  the  most  general 
nature ;  nothing  is  known  of  particulars.  The  limit  of  hu- 
man predictions  is  circumscribed  within  the  most  narrow 
boundary,  and  cannot  extend  to  things  specific,  minute,  and 
multiplied.  We  may  say  that  a  man  who  gives  himself  up  to 
the  habitual  sway  of  his  appetites  or  passions,  having  the  love 
of  strong  drink,  or  anger  and  violence,  will  die  prematurely. 
But  who  can  designate  the  hour  or  minute  of  his  decease? 
We  may  predict  from  the  ravages  of  the  pestilence  the  wide- 
spread disease  that  will  ensue;  but  who  can  mark  the  number 
of  victims,  or  foretell  the  exact  period  and  extent  of  the  in- 
roads of  the  unseen  destroyer? 

From  mathematical  laws  the  eclipse  may  be  predicted 
years  before  the  event  takes  place  ;  but  who  can  say  when  law 
itself  may  not  be  suspended  by  miracle,  or  foretell  the  future 
changes  that  will  take  place  among  those  myriads  of  worlds 

r  ^        (357) 


358  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

that  people  tlie  universe?  Even  upon  the  most  common 
events  of  life  uncertainty  rests.  The  darkness  that  encircles 
the  future,  none  but  an  omniscient  eye  can  penetrate.  The 
prophecies  of  the  Bible  differ  in  every  respect  from  the  pro- 
ductions of  heathen  oracles.  Kot  more  marked  is  the  differ- 
ence between  gold  and  its  counterfeit,  than  is  the  distinction 
between  the  prophecies  of  the  Scriptures  and  uninspired  pro- 
ductions. Take,  as  an  illustration,  the  celebrated  oracles  of 
Delphi  and  Dodona.  Here,  as  in  false  miracles,  we  can 
trace  every  wonder  to  mere  human  contrivance  and  the 
practiced  arts  of  successful  impostors.  Reason  itself  would 
dictate  that  it  was  impossible  for  man  to  predict  minutely, 
with  great  variety  of  specification,  and  combining  a  multi- 
tude of  improbabilities,  the  history  for  a  single  year  of  any 
person,  or  that  of  a  nation.  Now,  when  the  heathen  oracles 
were  consulted,  the  responses  given  had  reference  not  only  to 
a  short  period,  but  were  in  the  highest  degree  general  and 
vague.  They  were  only  procured  by  great  riches,  and  were 
surrounded  by  such  difficulties  as  to  be  for  any  good  end  not 
only  inaccessible,  but  useless.  Among  the  heathen  it  is 
estimated  that  there  were  in  repute  no  less  than  three  hun- 
dred oracles ;  but  an  illustration  of  a  few  will  give  the  char- 
acter of  the  whole.  Their  general  characteristics  were  am- 
biguity, obscurity,  and  convertibility.  Two  instances  in 
point  will  clearly  show  this.  "  When  Croesus  was  to  invade 
the  Medes  and  Persians,  he  consulted  the  oracle  of  Delphos 
as  to  the  issue  of  his  expedition."  The  answer  was,  "  that 
by  passing  the  river  Halys,  and  making  war  upon  the  Per- 
sians, he  would  ruin  a  great  empire."  What  empire?  his 
own,  or  that  of  the  Persians?  Crcesus  interpreted  the  empire  to 
be  that  of  the  Persians,  and  consequentl}^  made  war  upon  the 
Persians  and  lost  his  crown,  and  was  upon  the  point  also  of 
losing  his  life.  When  Pyrrhus  made  war  upon  the  Romans, 
the  same  oracle  was  consulted;  the  answer  was  couched  in  a 
single  line  of  Latin,  but  so  equivocal  in  meaning,  that  it  may 
be  read  either  that  "  Pyrrhus  should  conquer  the  Romans, 
or  that  the  Romans  should  conquer  Pyrrhus."  The  issue 
is  well  known.     Pyrrhus,  interpreting  the  oracle  in  his  favor, 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  359 

returned  defeated  to  his  country  after  a  long  and  disastrous 
struggle. 

Contrast  the  prophecies  of  the  Bible.  We  have  now  refer- 
ence to  fulfilled  prophecy  alone.  Unfulfilled  prophecy  has 
reference  to  the  mighty  events  of  the  future,  and,  whether 
clearly  or  obscurely  given,  is  to  be  interpreted  when  future 
history  shall  become  past  history,  and  the  world  itself  shall 
end.  But,  for  our  purpose,  it  is  only  necessary  to  speak  of 
those  prophecies  already  fulfilled,  and  to  show  by  the  exact 
correspondence  of  the  events  themselves  the  divine  origin  of 
the  Bible. 

Tn  considering  miracles,  it  will  be  seen  that  a  good  end  is 
one  essential  proof  of  a  miracle.  God  is  the  author  of  order, 
of  adaptation,  of  righteousness,  and  of  wisdom.  Conse- 
quently, when  he  works  a  miracle  it  is  to  some  good  purpose, 
to  bring  about  some  righteous  and  wise  end.  [Now,  the 
scheme  of  redemption  from  sin  and  its  fearful  consequences 
is  an  end  sufficiently  great,  wise,  and  good  to  call  for  the 
interposition  of  miracle  as  an  essential  means  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  such  an  end.  It  is  this  which  makes  Bible 
miracles  so  probable,  and  because  of  which  v,^q  are  called  so 
firmly  to  credit  the  evidence  given.  But  prophecy  is  as 
strong  an  evidence  of  the  divine  origin  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
is  as  essential  to  carry  out  the  great  system  of  redemption,  as 
miracles.  A  large  part  of  the  Bible  consists  of  prophecy. 
Commencing  with  Adam  in  Eden,  it  ends  only  when  another 
Eden,  fairer  than  that  which  was  lost,  shall  be  ushered  into 
the  world,  renewed  by  the  mighty  power  of  God  and  regen- 
erated by  the  Eternal  Spirit  through  all  its  countless  millions. 
If  miracles  hold  a  most  essential  place  in  the  Bible,  prophecy 
holds  a  position  as  important,  if  not  more  so.  It  forms  an 
argument  of  irresistible  force  to  prove  that  God  himself  was 
the  author  of  the  Bible,  making  use  in  its  composition  of 
man  as  the  instrument  of  his  will. 

The  great  end  of  prophecy  is  to  unfold  the  vast  scheme 
of  redemption  by  Christ  in  its  commencement  and  in  its 
termination.  It  is  to  unfold  to  man  in  every  age  the 
vast   purposes    of  God's    redeeming    love.      We    therefore 


360  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

find  that  prophecy  bridges  over  the  whole  interval  of  man's 
history.  It  begins  with  an  Eden  lost,  and  ends  in  an  Eden 
restored.  ISTow,  as  it  is  impossible  for  a  human  mind  to 
conceive  of  the  scheme  of  redemption  as  revealed  in  the 
Bible,  it  is  equally  impossible  for  any  uninspired  mind  to 
give  the  history  of  that  redemption  ;  and  yet  we  find  exactly 
portrayed  in  the  Old  Testament,  centuries  before  the  fulfill- 
ment, the  character  of  Christ,  the  Messiah,  and  his  future  suf- 
ferings, death,  and  resurrection.  What  mortal  man  could  fab- 
ricate such  a  character,  or  predict  it?  What  number  of  men 
could  combine  together  to  invent  a  story  to  be  proved  true 
ill  after-ages  in  the  most  minute  details,  and,  without  collu- 
sion with  one  another,  to  find  that  story  consistent  in  every 
part  and  realized  in  the  whole  ?  There  is  not  only  an  impos- 
sibility upon  the  side  of  motive,  but  of  ability.  For  Moses, 
for  David,  for  Isaiah  and  Daniel  to  predict  the  coming  Mes- 
siah, accurately  portray  his  character,  the  redemption  from 
sin  he  was  to  secure  to  mankind,  and  yet  each  living  in  dif- 
ferent ages  of  the  world,  with  no  community  of  interest,  no 
motive  possible  for  deception,  this  must  show  them  to  be 
inspired  by  God. 

Consider  that  the  one  was  the  lawgiver  to  the  Jews,  the 
other  a  mighty  king.  Isaiah,  according  to  tradition,  was 
sawn  asunder  six  hundred  and  ninety-eight  years  before 
Christ,  and  Daniel  was  thrown  for  his  integrity  into  the  lions' 
den.  Can  now  those  separate  predictions,  all  verified  by  the 
events  with  so  remote  a  separation  of  time  and  so  great  a 
diversity  of  circumstance,  have  their  origin  from  no  divine 
source  ?  If  there  is  anything  in  which  human  ability  shows 
its  weakness,  its  utter  impotency,  it  is  in  predicting  things 
in  the  future.  With  all  the  light  of  experience,  with  all  the 
aid  of  analogy,  with  all  the  assistance  of  history,  philosophy, 
and  science,  nothing  is  so  perfectly  beyond  the  mind  of  man 
as  any  intelligent  or  minute  predictions  of  events  of  human 
conduct  to  transpire  a  year  hence;  but  that  inability  is  aug- 
mented a  thousandfold  when  centuries  and  ages  must  inter- 
vene between  the  giving  and  the  accomplishment  of  the 
prophecy.  Mohammed  never  based  his  Koran  upon  prophecy; 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  3(11 

the  most  successful  of  impostors,  he  never  presumed  to  tax 
the  credulity  of  the  darkest  age  of  the  world  by  any  attempt 
at  prophecy.  So  certainly  would  this  fail  him  that  he  would 
not  attempt  that  which,  unsuccessful,  would  prove  the  most 
powerful  enemy  to  his  cause.  Why,  then,  did  the  Bible  risk 
everything  upon  prophecy,  even  as  miracles  ?  Why  did  the 
writers  of  the  Scriptures  attempt  wonders  so  great?  The 
reason  is,  God,  not  man,  was  the  source  of  inspiration  ;  divine 
truth  fears  no  scrutiny,  however  searching.  The  end  for 
which  all  prophecy  was  given  was  to  subserve  the  great 
purpose  of  building  the  temple  of  Christianity.  In  that  tem- 
ple there  was  a  use  for  stones  of  every  variety,  and  every 
material  that  composed  it;  each  had  its  separate  position  and 
its  peculiar  office.  As  one  vast  system,  Christianity  was  a 
scheme  to  be  developed  gradually.  Every  age  went  to  make 
up  a  part  of  that  temple  that  was  destined  ultimatel}^  to 
be  perfected  in  one  glorious  fabric  of  truth  and  love. 

Let  us  now  consider  some  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Bible 
as  revealing  its  origin  from  God.  We  have  seen  how  we 
may  discriminate  between  true  and  false  prophecy.  The  last 
is  general,  equivocal,  ambiguous,  and  having  only  a  short 
period  for  veriiication,  and,  above  all,  given  under  circum- 
stances highly  favorable  for  conjecture.  The  true  prophec}^ 
must  be  minute,  discriminating,  clearly  corresponding  with 
the  event  predicted,  and  given  under  circumstances  where 
mere  conjecture  is  impossible;  and,  to  crown  the  whole, 
the  end  to  be  attained  unto,  as  in  miracles,  must  be  shown 
to  be  wise  and  good,  such  as  is  worthy  of  God  and  useful 
to  man.  By  such  tests  let  us  examine  the  prophecies  of 
the  Bible,  to  see  if  indeed  they  are  genuine.  We  have 
spoken  of  the  general  scope  of  prophecy  in  its  relation  to 
Christ  and  his  scheme  of  redemption.  Before,  then,  entering 
upon  the  investigation  of  the  more  important  prophecies,  we 
will  give,  as  an  illustration  of  the  minuteness  of  detail  in  the 
prophecies  of  the  Bible,  a  few  illustrations  from  those  prophe- 
cies less  noticed  by  the  general  reader. 

The  destruction  of  the  altar  of  Bethel  was  predicted  in  the 
year  before  Christ  975:  "And  behold,  there  came  a  man  of 


362  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

God  out  of  Judab,  by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  0  altar!  altar! 
thus  saith  the  Lord,  Behold,  a  child  shall  be  born  unto  the 
house  of  David,  Josiah  by  name,  and  upon  thee  shall  he 
offer  the  priests  of  the  high  places  that  burn  incense  upon 
thee,  and  men's  bones  shall  be  burned  upon  thee."  An  im- 
mediate sign  was  superadded  in  the  withering  of  Jeroboam's 
arm,  and  in  the  rending  of  the  altar,  and  the  accomplish- 
ment of  this  prediction  was  in  the  year  before-  Christ  624, 
,and  the  interval  between  the  prophecy  and  the  fulfillment 
was  three  hundred  and  fifty-one  years;  Josephus  makes  the 
years  that  intervene  three  hundred  and  sixty-one.  Thus  we 
see  in  respect  to  time  how  remote  the  prophecy  was  from  its 
fulfillment.  Li  the  twenty-third  chapter  of  the  second  of 
Kings  we  read  in  these  words  of  the  fulfillment  of  a  pro- 
phecy more  than  three  centuries  and  a  half  after  its  pre- 
diction. 

"Moreover,  the  altar  that  was  at  Bethel,  and  the  high 
place  which  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat,  who  made  Israel  to 
sin,  had  made,  both  that  altar  and  the  high  place  he  broke 
down,  and  burned  the  high  place,  and  stamped  it  small  to 
powder,  and  burned  the  grove;  and  as  Josiah  turned  himself 
he  spied  the  sepulchers  that  were  there  in  the  mount,  and 
sent  and  took  the  bones  out  of  the  sepulchers,  and  burned 
them  upon  the  altar,  and  polluted  it,  according  to  the  word 
of  the  Lord  which  the  man  of  God  proclaimed."  Observe 
how  exact  was  this  accomplishment,  although  the  distance 
that  intervened  was  between  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  and  the 
reign  of  Josiah. 

At  the  fall  of  Jericho,  "  Joshua  adjured  them,  saying, 
Cursed  be  the  man,  before  the  Lord,  that  riseth  up  and 
buildeth  this  city  of  Jericho;  he  shall  lay  the  foundation 
thereof  in  his  first-born,  and  in  his  youngest  son  shall  he  set 
up  the  gates  of  it."  This  sentence  was  pronounced  in  the 
year  before  Christ  915.  In  the  first  of  Kings,  sixteenth  chap- 
ter, we  read:  "In  his  days,"  that  is,  during  the  reign  of 
Ahab,  "did  Iliel  the  Bethelite  build  Jericho;  he  laid  the 
foundation  thereof  in  Abram,  his  first-born,  and  set  up  the 
2:ates  thereof  in  his  voungest  son,  Seo-ab,  according  to  the 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  303 

word  of  the  Lord  which  he  spake  by  Joshua,  the  son  of 
Nun."  Between  the  prophecy  and  the  event  there  is  a  space 
of  five  hundred  and  tliirty-three  years.  As  an  example  of 
minute  prediction  and  singular  fulfillment,  compare  the 
twenty-fourth  chapter  of  Jeremiah  with  the  twelfth  of  Ezekiel. 
In  the  former  scripture  it  was  foretold  by  one  prophet  that 
Zedekiah,  the  king  of  Judah,  should  be  delivered  into  the 
hand  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  behold  his  eyes,  and  speak 
with  him  mouth  to  mouth,  and  go  to  Babylon.  In  the  latter, 
it  was  foretold  by  another  prophet  that  Zedekiah  should  not 
see  Babylon,  though  he  should  die  there.  But  is  there  not 
a  contradiction  here?  How  could  Zedekiah  be  taken  to 
Babylon,  behold  her  king,  and  die  there,  and  yet  never  see 
the  city  ?  But  the  history  of  the  kings  of  Judah,  written 
without  any  design  of  pointing  out  the  fulfillment  of  proph- 
ecy, explains  this  difRculty.  Zedekiah  was  delivered  into 
the  hands  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  beheld  his  eyes,  and 
spoke  with  him  mouth  to  mouth,  not,  however,  at  Babylon, 
but  at  Riblah.  Then  his  eyes  were  put  out,  by  command  of 
his  captor.  In  this  state  he  went  to  Babylon,  and  died  there, 
having  never  seen  the  city  of  his  captivity. 

As  another  illustration  of  wonderful  minuteness  as  well 
as  accuracy,  consider  the  prophecies  of  the  fall  and  destruc- 
tion of  Babylon,  the  most  ancient  of  the  cities  of  the  Old 
World.  It  became  so  famous  after  the  time  of  N'ebuchad- 
nezzar  that  it  was  called  the  Great  Babylon,  the  glory  of  king- 
doms, the  beauty  of  the  Chaldee's  excellency.  With  a  circuit 
of  walls  sixty  miles  in  compass,  it  was  located  in  a  most  fer- 
tile plain.  The  city  had  a  hundred  gates,  made  of  solid 
brass,  and  its  mighty  walls,  according  to  Herodotus,  Avere 
three  hundred  and  fifty  feet  in  height  and  eighty-seven  feet 
in  thickness,  so  that  six  chariots  could  go  abreast  upon  them. 
How  improbable,  to  human  calculation,  that  a  city  so  power- 
ful, the  metropolis  of  a  vast  empire,  should  come,  with  all  its 
strength,  to  naught  !  But  Isaiah,  one  hundred  and  sixty 
years  before  her  ruin,  when  she  was  at  the  height  of  her 
glory,  predicted  :  "It  shall  never  be  inhabited,  neither  shall 
it  be  dwelt  in  from  generation  to  o-encration,  neither  shall 


364  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

the  Arabian  pitcli  tent  there,  neither  shall  the  shepherds 
make  their  fold  there.  But  wild  beasts  of  the  desert  shall 
lie  there,  and  the  houses  shall  be  full  of  doleful  creatures, 
and  owls  shall  dwell  there,  and  satyrs  shall  dance  there,  and 
the  wild  beasts  of  the  desert  shall  cry  in  their  desolate  houses, 
and  dragons  in  their  pleasant  palaces."  "  How  hath  the 
golden  city  ceased!"  "Her  pomp  is  brought  down  to  the 
grave."  Sixteen  centuries  have  passed  since  her  foundations 
were  inhabited  by  a  human  being.  Deterred  by  reptiles  and 
wild  beasts,  the  wandering  Arab  never  pitches  his  tent  there. 
Once  famous  for  the  richness  of  its  pastures,  the  shepherds 
make  no  fold.  Reptiles,  bats,  and  doleful  creatures,  jackals, 
hyenas,  and  lions,  inhabit  the  holes  and  caverns  and  marshes 
of  the  desolate  city.  In  the  fourth  century  Babylon  was  a 
hunting-ground  for  the  Persian  monarchs.  By  the  over- 
flowing of  the  Euphrates,  pools  of  stagnant  water  are  left 
in  the  hollow  places  of  the  ancient  site,  thus  realizing  the 
prediction,  '■'■  It  shall  he  a  2)ossession  for  the  bitieni,  and  pools  of 
water.'''  The  manner  of  the  taking  of  the  city  was  no  less 
clearly  predicted.  First,  the  river  was  to  be  dried  up;  "  And 
I  will  dry  up  the  rivers ;"  and  this  is  declared  in  reference 
to  Cyrus,  whom  the  prophet  calls  his  shepherd;  and  by  him 
the  river  was  turned  out  of  its  channel.  Then  the  brazen 
gates  were  to  be  left  open.  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  to  his 
anointed,  to  Cyrus, — I  will  loose  the  loins  of  kings,  to  open 
before  him  the  two-leaved  gates,  and  the  gates  shall  not  be 
shut."  By  the  oversight  of  the  Babylonians,  the  gates  were 
left  open  on  the  night  of  the  festival,  when  the  king  was 
slain.  Notice  another  minute  circumstance  of  a  prophecy 
given  more  than  a  century  before  its  fulfillment.  The  assault 
was  to  be  on  two  sides  of  the  city,  north  and  south.  "One 
part  shall  run  to  meet  another,  and  one  messenger  to  meet 
another,  to  show  the  king  of  Babylon  that  his  city  is  taken  at 
one  end,"  or  is  taken  at  "  each  end."  Cyrus  commanded  his 
troops  to  enter  in  two  detachments  the  city,  by  each  of  the 
sides  through  which  the  river  passed,  and  to  advance  till 
they  met  in  the  center. 

Tyre  was  once  the  emporium  of  the  world,  the  theater  of 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  365 

an  immense  commerce  and  navigation.  "  Situate  at  the 
entry  of  the  sea,  she  was  a  merchant  of  the  people  for  many 
isles,  all  nations  were  her  merchants  in  all  sorts  of  things.  The 
ships  of  Tarshish  did  sing  of  her  in  the  market,  and  she  was 
replenished  and  made  very  glorious  in  the  midst  of  the  seas." 
It  was  of  this  mistress  of  princes  that  Ezekiel  prophesied  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord,  "  I  will  scrape  the  dust  from  her  and 
make  her  like  the  top  of  a  rock.  It  shall  be  a  place  for  the 
spreading  of  nets  in  the  midst  of  the  sea."  "N"ot  only  was 
her  utter  ruin  pointed  out,  but  even  the  use  that  would  be 
made  of  her  site,  and  the  kind  of  men  that  would  inhabit 
her,  were  pointed  out  more  than  a  thousand  years  before  her 
complete  destruction.  Shaw,  in  his  Travels,  describes  the 
port  of  Tyre  as  so  choked  up  that  the  boats  of  ihe  fishermen, 
loho  now  and  then  come  to  the  place  and  dry  their  nets  upon  its 
rocks  and  ruins,  can  hardly  enter.  The  iniidel  Volney  says 
the  whole  village  of  Tyre  contains  only  fifty  or  sixt}'  poor 
families,  who  live  obscurely  on  the  produce  of  their  little 
ground  and  a  trifling  fishery. 

Concerning  Egypt,  once  so  mighty,  it  was  said,  "It  shall 
be  the  basest  of  the  kingdoms  ;  neither  shall  it  exalt  itself 
any  more  above  the  nations ;  that  the  pride  of  her  power 
should  come  down ;  that  her  land,  and  all  that  was  there- 
in, should  be  made  waste  by  the  hand  of  strangers;  that 
there  should  be  no  more  a  prince  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
the  scepter  of  Egypt  should  depart  awa}"."  The  most  re- 
markable portion  of  this  prophecy  is  that  which  declares 
that  there  shall  be  no  more  a  prince  of  the  land  of  Egypt. 
From  the  conquest  of  the  Persians,  three  hundred  and 
fifty  years  before  Christ,  to  the  present  day,  Egypt  has 
been  broken,  she  has  been  governed  by  strangers,  and 
every  eftbrt  to  raise  an  Egyptian  to  the  throne  has  been  de- 
feated. Egypt  has  literally  been,  since  that  conquest,  the 
basest  of  kingdoms.  Says  the  infidel  Volney,  confirming 
every  delineation  of  revelation,  "Deprived  twenty-three  cen- 
turies ago  of  her  natural  proprietors,  she  has  seen  her  fertile 
fields  successively  a  prey  to  the  Persians,  the  Macedonians, 
the  Romans,  the  Greeks,  the  Arabs,  the  Georgians,  and  at 


366  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

length  the  race  of  Tartars,  distinguished  by  the  name  of  Ot- 
toman Turks.  The  Mamelukes,  purchased  as  slaves  and  in- 
troduced as  soldiers,  soon  usurped  the  power  and  elected  a 
leader.  If  their  first  establishment  was  a  sino-ular  event, 
their  continuance  was  no  less  extraordinary.  They  are  re- 
placed by  slaves  brought  from  their  original  country.  The 
system  of  oppression  is  methodical.  Everything  the  trav- 
eler sees  or  hears  reminds  him  he  is  in  the  country  of  slavery 
and  tyranny."  Who  but  God  could  portray  thus  accurately, 
through  ages  of  time,  the  history  of  'these  nations  of  anti- 
quity ? 

"Where  now  is  Babylon,  with  her  hundred  gates  of  brass, 
her  lofty  walls,  her  noble  palaces,  the  wonder  of  millions? 
Where  is  Tyre,  queen  of  cities,  the  haven  of  ships,  control- 
ling the  commerce  of  the  nations?  Where  is  Egypt,  that 
land  of  the  pyramids,  where  the  Pharaohs  reigned,  the 
richest  of  countries,  the  granary  of  the  world?  Alas  !  deso- 
lation reigns  supreme.  The  proud  monuments  of  human 
grandeur  and  wealth  have  crumbled  into  the  dust.  The 
warrior  and  the  slave,  the  king  and  the  peasant,  the  mighty 
and  the  obscure,  rest  in  one  common  oblivion  and  sleep  in 
one  common  ruin.  But  the  word  of  God  shall  stand,  and 
his  truth  be  fulfilled,  though  kingdoms  fall  to  rise  no  more, 
though  empires  pass  away  as  a  dream,  and  all  the  glory  of 
the  earth  come  to  naught. 

Every  reader  of  history  knows  that  after  the  deluge  the 
human  family  proceeded  in  three  great  lines  of  population 
from  the  three  sons  of  Noah, — Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth. 
From  these  three  sons  the  world  was  to  be  repeopled  with 
inhabitants.  The  human  family  w^as  to  diverge  in  three 
mighty  streams  of  population,  whose  waters  were  ultimatelv 
to  extend  over  the  remotest  regions  of  the  earth,  and  yet 
each  stream  was  to  have  distinct  characteristics  that  should 
with  infallible  precision  mark  the  history  of  each  separate 
race  to  the  end  of  time. 

Let  lis  then  observe  if  actual  events  in  the  history  of  the 
world  have  verified  the  predictions  of  Noah  to  his  three  sons, 
as  the  representatives  of  the  three  great  races  of  men  who 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  367 

have  peopled,  and  do  now  people,  the  earth.  It  is  unnecevSsary 
to  dwell  upon  the  circumstances  of  Noah's  predictions  to  his 
three  sons.  The  common  version  of  the  Bible  reads,  "  And 
he  said,  Cursed  be  Canaan  ;  a  servant  of  servants  shall  he  be 
unto  his  brethren.  And  he  said,  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of 
Shem ;  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  servant,  God  shall  enlarge 
Japheth,  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem ;  and  Ca- 
naan shall  be  his  servant."  Now,  Canaan  was  the  son  of 
Ham,  and  Ham,  the  father  of  Canaan,  is  mentioned  in  the 
preceding  part  of  the  stoi-y.  In  these  three  verses  the 
Arabic  version  has  "father  of  Canaan"  instead  of  "Canaan.'' 
Some  copies  of  the  Septuagint  have  Ham  instead  of  Canaan  ; 
and,  with  great  reason,  the  most  correct  reading  of  the  Hebrew 
text  has  been  believed  to  be,  "  Cursed  be  Ham,  the  father  of 
Canaan;  a  servant  of  servants  shall  he  be  unto  his  brethren." 
But,  however  the  Hebrew  text  may  be  translated,  the  import 
of  the  prophecy  had  peculiar  reference  to  the  posterity  of  the 
three  sons,  as  the  representatives  of  the  three  races  that  were 
to  people  the  world. 

What  has  been  the  fulfillment  of  this  prophecy?  In  the 
first  place,  the  descendants  of  Ham,  or  Canaan,  were  to  be, 
in  their  social  and  civil  condition,  inferior  to  the  descendants 
of  Shem  and  Japheth,  and  in  a  state  of  servitude  to  them. 
This  was  the  general  characteristic  of  the  posterit}'  of  Ham. 
From  Ham  descended  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  and  Go- 
morrah, the  aborigines  of  Palestine,  under  the  general  name 
of  Canaanites,  whom  the  children  of  Israel,  or  descendants 
of  Shem,  expelled  from  the  land  and  reduced  to  servitude. 
From  Ham  Egypt  was  settled,  and  most  of  Africa.  Observe, 
now,  the  history  of  Ham's  posterity  from  the  earliest  age  to 
the  present  day.  Says  Bishop  Newton,  "  It  is  very  well  known 
that  the  word  brethren.,  in  Hebrew,  comprehends  more  distant 
relations.  The  descendants  of  Canaan  were  to  be  subjected 
to  the  descendants  of  both  Shem  and  Japheth ;  and  the 
natural  consequence  of  vice  in  communities,  as  well  as  in 
single  persons,  is  slavery."  The  wars  of  the  Israelites  with 
the  ancient  Canaanites  clearly  show  their  subjection,  through 
centuries,  to  the  posterity  of  Shem.     The  land  of  Ham  was 


368  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

subdued  bj  the  Persians,  the  descendants  of  Sbem ;  after- 
wards by  tlie  Grecians,  the  posterity  of  Japheth,  and  from 
that  time  it  has  been  constantly  in  subjection  to  the  posterity 
either  of  Shem  or  Japheth. 

The  whole  continent  of  Africa  was  peopled  principally  by 
the  children  of  Ham;  and  for  how  many  ages  have  the  better 
parts  of  the  country  been  under  the  dominion  of  the  Romans, 
then  of  the  Saracens,  and  now  of  the  Turks!  Look  to  the 
barbarism,  the  deep  ignorance,  the  innumerable  savage  tribes, 
the  wide-spread  bondage,  and  the  fearful  atrocities  of  the  slave- 
trade,  that  for  ages  have  existed  in  that  ill-fated  country  ! 
IIow  evident  the  fulfillment  of  prophecy !  Of  Shem  it 
was  said,  "Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem,  and  Canaan 
shall  be  his  servant;"  plainly  intimating  that  the  Lord  would 
be  his  God  in  a  peculiar  manner.  Consequently,  we  iind  the 
Israelites  the  descendants  of  Shem,  and  that  for  several  gen- 
erations the  church  of  God  was  among  his  posterit}',  and 
especially  of  them,  as  concerning  the  flesh,  Christ  came. 

Of  Japheth  it  was  said,  "  God  shall  enlarge  Japheth,  and 
he  shall  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem ;  and  Canaan  shall  be 
servant  to  them,"  or  their  servant.  Was,  then,  Japheth 
more  enlarged  than  the  rest  ?  This  was  true  in  two  respects, 
both  in  territory-  and  in  children. 

Japheth's  posterity  included  all  Europe,  and  the  possession 
of  lesser  Asia,  Media,  part  of  Armenia,  Iberia,  and  Albania, 
and  the  vast  regions  of  the  ISTorth  which  anciently  the  Scy- 
thians inhabited,  but  now  the  Tartars.  The  progeny  also  of 
Japheth  excelled  that  of  Shem,  or  Ham.  It  was  also  said 
that  he  "should  dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem."  In  either 
sense  the  prophecy  has  been  most  literally  fulfilled.  In  the 
former  sense,  it  was  true  when  the  Shechinah  or  divine  pres- 
ence rested  on  the  ark,  and  dwelt  in  the  tabernacle  and 
temple  of  the  Jews  ;  and,  in  the  latter  sense,  it  was  fulfilled 
when  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  the  descendants  of  Japheth, 
subdued  and  possessed  Judea,  and  other  countries  belonging 
to  Shem. 

Of  Ishmael  it  was  predicted,  "  And  he  will  be  a  wild 
man;  his  hand  will  be  against  every  man,  and  every  man's 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  369 

hand  against  him,  and  he  shall  dwell  in  the  presence  of  his 
brethren."  "And  I  will  make  him  a  great  nation."  Most 
literally  has  this  prophecy  been  fulfilled  in  the  posterity  of 
Ishmael.  They  have  lived  to  the  present  da}'  by  prey  and 
rapine.  They  have  ever  existed  a  distinct  people.  Two  cir- 
cumstances most  extraordinary  have  marked  the  descendants 
of  Ishmael, — a  state  of  continual  war,  hateful  and  hated,  and 
yet  an  existence  in  the  presence  of  all  other  nations.  While 
Ishmael's  hand  was  against  every  man,  and  every  man's  hand 
against  him,  he  yetj  to  the  present  day,  has  dwelt  in  the  pres- 
ence of  his  brethren.  The  sword,  that  has  devoured  so  many 
nations,  has  spared  the  posterity  of  Ishmael.  In  constant  war- 
fare, the  sons  of  Ishmael,  free,  independent,  never  subdued, 
have  been  the  wild,  untamed  children  of  the  desert.  Not- 
withstanding the  perpetual  enmity  between  them  and  the  rest 
of  mankind,  the  Arabs,  the  children  of  Ishmael,  have  never 
been  conquered.  Alexander,  the  conqueror  of  Asia,  in  vain 
attempted  to  subdue  them.  The  Persians,  who  preceded  the 
Grecians,  could  never  compel  the  nation,  as  a  body,  to  pay 
tribute,  or  reduce  the  wandering  Arabs  to  obedience.  In 
vain  the  Romans  strove  to  subdue  the  whole  nation.  Their 
success  was  onl}-  partial,  and  speedily  followed  by  total  dis- 
comfiture. Pompey,  Trajan,  and  Severus,  with  great  armies, 
attempted  the  conquest  of  this  wild  race,  but  only  to  expe- 
rience defeat.  When  we  come  to  the  time  of  their  famous 
prophet  Mohammed,  we  see  the  Saracens  overrunning,  in  a 
few  years,  more  countries  than  the  Romans  in  many  centu- 
ries; but  while  the  Arabs  were  often  masters,  the}-  were 
never  slaves,  and  when  their  great  empire  was  dissolved,  and 
they  were  confined  to  their  native  limits,  they  yet  preserved 
their  independence  against  Tartars,  Mamelukes,  Turks,  and 
all  foreign  enemies  whatever.  To  this  day  the  Turks,  lords  of 
the  adjacent  countries,  so  far  from  being  able  to  restrain  the 
depredations  of  the  Arabs,  have  been  compelled  to  pay  them 
an  annual  tribute  for  the  safe  passage  and  security  of  the 
pilgrims  who  go  in  great  companies  to  Mecca. 

Notice  the  predictions  in  relation  to  Abraham,  Jacob,  and 
his  twelve  sons. 

24 


370  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

Of  Abraham  it  was  said,  "  That  in  blessing  I  will  bless 
thee,  and  in  multiplying  I  will  multiply  thy  seed  as  the 
stars  of  the  heaven,  and  as  the  sand  which  is  upon  the  sea- 
shore ;  and  thy  seed  shall  possess  the  gate  of  his  enemies ; 
and  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed ; 
because  thou  hast  obeyed  my  voice." 

Now,  Abraham  was  born  about  two  thousand  years  before 
Christ;  and  most  literally  have  the  predictions  concerning 
Abraham  been  accomplished.  First,  as  to  his  posterity. 
The  family  of  this  patriarch  has  from  remote  antiquity  been 
extremely  numerous  ;  from  him  are  derived  many  tribes  of 
Arabs,  descending  through  Ishmael,  and  others  by  Keturah, 
to  say  nothing  of  the  Jews ;  neither  has  there  been  on  the 
face  of  the  earth,  since  Noah  and  his  sons,  any  man  whose 
posterity  is  equally  extensive  ;  any  man  to  whom  so  many  na- 
tions refer  their  origin.  Others  may  have  begotten  families, 
but  Abraham  is  the  father  of  nations.  Hoav  truly  were  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth  blessed  in  the  great  fact  that  Christ 
was  of  the  seed  of  Abraham ! 

Notice,  also,  the  predictions  of  Jacob  respecting  his  twelve 
sons.  All  were  exactly  carried  out ;  their  separate  conditions 
in  the  land  of  Canaan,  also  the  superiorit}'  of  Judah,  and  that 
through  him  in  the  line  of  descent  the  Messiah  should  come, 
were  each  verified  by  the  events.  How  wonderfully  has  his- 
tory shown,  in  the  relation  Judah  sustained  to  the  other 
tribes  of  Israel,  and  that  the  scepter  continued  among  the 
Jews,  and  that  they  had  kings  of  their  own  nation  in  the 
persons  of  the  Herods,  the  truthfulness  of  the  prediction, 
"  The  scepter  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a  lawgiver 
from  between  his  feet,  until  Shiloh  come  ;  and  unto  him  shall 
the  gathering  of  the  people  be."  It  was  only  after  the  com- 
ing of  the  Messiah,  the  Shiloh  of  prophecy,  that  the  final  dis- 
persion of  the  Jewish  race  took  place,  and  the  dominion 
passed  away  with  their  temple  and  civil  power. 

Consider,  also,  the  surprising  delineations  of  Daniel  in 
respect  to  the  four  great  empires  of  the  earth,  each  to  be 
erected  upon  the  ruins  of  the  preceding  kingdom.  Now, 
Daniel  was  born  about  six  centuries  before  Christ.     At  the 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  371 

time  of  his  prediction,  Babylon,  the  metropolis  of  Chaldea, 
stood  at  the  head  of  the  nations  of  the  earth ;  and  yet,  soon 
after,  the  gloiy  of  it  passed  away.  So  minnte  and  compre- 
hensive were  the  prophecies  of  Daniel,  embracing  the  history 
of  Chaldea,  Persia,  Macedon,  and  Rome,  so  exact  was  the 
fnlfillment  in  every  particular,  that  Porphyry,  the  most 
learned  of  the  enemies  of  Christianity  in  the  third  century, 
impressed  with  the  exact  correspondence  between  the  predic- 
tions and  the  event,  asserted  that  the  prophecy  could  not 
have  been  written  by  Daniel,  but  by  some  one  in  Judea  in 
the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes ;  while  Paine,  famous 
for  his  iniidelity,  and  no  less  so  for  his  wretched  end,  con- 
fessed the  authenticity  of  the  book  of  Daniel.  Paine  denud 
the  fulfillment.  Porphyry  the  authenticit}' ;  Porphyry  ac- 
knowledged the  fulfillment,  Paine  the  authenticity.  ^'■He 
taketh  the  wise  in  their  own  craftiness." 

"  Now,  we  conclude,"  sa3^s  Calmet,  "  that  if  we  find  cer- 
tain events  predicted  long  before  they  happened, — if  they  be 
so  clearly  described  that,  when  completed,  the  description 
applies  to  the  subject, — if  they  be  related  by  persons  entirely 
unconcerned  in  the  events,  and  expecting  to  be  removed 
trom  the  stage  of  life  long  before  they  took  place,  then  we 
demonstrate  that  some  power  superior  to  humanity  has  been 
pleased  to  impart  so  much  of  its  designs  and  counsels'as  are 
referred  to  in  such  predictions." 

Calmet  in  his  Dictionary  of  the  Holy  Bible  has,  in  Daniel's 
Prophecy  of  Four  Kingdoms,  represented  by  four  beasts, 
given  with  great  brevity  and  comprehensiveness  their  fulfill- 
ment. Let  us  observe  this  instance  of  prophecy  compared 
with  history,  the  chief  incidents  only  being  selected  and 
numbered. 

THE  FIEST  BEAST.  ASSYEIAN  EMPIKE. 

1.  A  lion,  The  Babylonian  empire; 

2.  having  eagle's  wings;  Nineveh,  etc.  added  to  it — but 

3.  the  wings  were  plucked  ;  Nineveh  was  almost  destroyed  at  the 

fall  of  Sardanapalus ; 

4.  it  was  raised  from  the  ground,         yet  this  empire  was  again  elevated  to 

power, 


372 


EVIDENCE   OF  PBOPHECF. 


THE  FIRST  BEAST. 


ASSYRIAN  EMPIRE. 


5.  and  made  to  stand  on  the  feet  as     and  seemed  to  acquire  stability  under 

a  man,  Nebuchadnezzar, 

6.  and  a  man's  heart  was  given  to  it.     who  laid  the  foundation  of  its  subse- 

quent policy  and  authority. 
(Dan.  chap,  iv.) 


THE  SECOND  BEAST. 


PERSIAN  EMPIRE. 


1.  A  ram, 

2.  which  had  two  horns, 

3.  both  high, 

4.  but  one  higher  than  the  other 

5.  the  highest  came  up  last ; 


Darius,  or  the  Persian  power, 
composed  of  Media  and  Persia, 
both  considerable  provinces. 
Media  the  most  powerful : 
yet  this  most  powerful   Median   em- 
pire, under  Dejoces,  rose  after  the 
other, 

6.  the  ram  pushed  north  west,  south,     and  extended  its  conquests  under  Cy- 

rus over  Lydia,  etc.,  west;  over 
Asia,  north ;  over  Babylon,  etc., 
south,  and, 

7.  did   as   he   pleased,   and  became     ruling  over  such  extent  of  country, 

great.  was  a  great  empire. 


THE  THIRD  BEAST. 

1.  A  he-goat 

2.  came  from  the  west, 

3.  gliding  swiftly  over  the  earth  ; 

4.  ran  into  the  ram  in  the  fury  of  his 

power, 

5.  smote  him, 

6.  brake  his  two  horns, 

7.  cast  him  on  the  ground, 

8.  stamped  on  him,  and 

9.  waxed  very  great. 

10.  When   he   was  strong,  his  great 

horn  was  broken,  and 

11.  instead  of  it  came  up  four  not  able 

ones 


GRECIAN  EMPIRE. 

Alexander,  or  the  Greek  power, 
came  from  Europe  (west  of  Asia) 
with  unexampled  rapidity  of  success  ; 
attacked  Darius  furiously  and 

beat  him  at  the  Granicus,  Issus,  etc., 

conquered  Persia  and  Media,  etc., 

ruined  the  power  of  Darius, 

insomuch  that  Darius  was  mur- 
dered,  etc. 

Alexander  overran  Bactriana,  to  In- 
dia; 

but  died  at  Babylon,  in  the  zenith  of 
his  fsime  and  power  ; 

his  dominions  were  parceled  among 
Seleucus,  Antigonus,  Ptolemy, 
Cassander  (who  had  been  his  offi- 
cers), 


EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY.  373 


THE  THIRD  BEAST.  GEECIAN  EMPIRE. 

12.  toward  the  four  winds  of  heaven  ;     in    Babylon,    Asia     Minor,    Egypt, 

Greece. 

13.  out  of  one  of  them  a  little  horn     Antiochus   the   Great,  succeeded  by 

waxed  great  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 

14.  toward  the  south  and  east,  conquered  Egypt,  etc., 

15.  which  took  away  the  daily  sacri-     and    endeavored    utterly   to    subvert 

lice,  and  cast  down  the  sanctu-  the  Jewish  polity,  polluting  their 

ary.  temple,  worship,  and  sacrifices  to 

the  utmost  of  his  power. 
(Dan.  chap.  vii.  3-12.) 


Now,  Calmet  makes  Daniel's  vision  of  the  Four  Beasts  in 
the  beginning  of  Belshazzar's  reign,  a.  m.  3-148 ;  and  the 
time  when  Darius  Codomannus  was  conquered  by  Alexan- 
der the  Great,  a.  m.  3674 ;  and  the  time  when  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  forcibly  took  Jerusalem  and  entered  the  temple, 
robbing  it  of  precious  vessels  to  the  value  of  eighteen 
hundred  talents,  a.  m.  3834.  Thus,  in  one  case  there  is 
an  interval  of  one  hundred  and  twenty-six  years,  and  in  the 
other  of  three  hundred  and  eighty-six  years,  between  the  pre- 
diction and  the  fulfillment. 

"  When  I  behold  a  scheme,"  says  Bishop  Mcllvaine,  "  so 
vast  as  to  embrace  all  time,  and  yet  so  minute  that  it  can  de-* 
tail  the  events  of  an  hour ;  so  general  that  in  a  few  lines  it 
predicts  the  history  of  the  four  mightiest  empires,  and  yet  so 
particular  that  chapters  are  devoted  to  the  history  of  one  in- 
dividual ;  80  diversified  in  its  materials  as  to  be  made  up  of 
contributions  from  men  of  all  ages  and  minds  during  a 
period  of  four  thousand  years,  and  yet  so  identical  that  one 
spirit  and  one  grand  harmonious  purpose  animate  the  whole; 
when  I  compare  all  this,  arrayed  as  it  is  in  the  richest  poetry 
and  loftiest  eloquence  that  eye  of  man  ever  read,  with  what- 
ever else  in  the  world  ever  pretended  to  the  praise  of  pro- 
phecy :  I  behold  a  grandeur  of  conception,  a  sublimity  of  de- 
sign, an  all-controlling  power  of  execution,  a  unity  ajid 
self-depending  supremacy  of  mind  which  bespeaks  the  om- 
niscience and  omnipotence  of  Ilim  who  '  was,  and  is,  and  is  to 
come,  the  Almighty.'  I  say  nothing  yet  of  the  fuliillment  of  any 


374  EVIDENCE   OF  PROPHECY. 

portion  of  this  stupendous  plan ;  I  only  say,  look  at  the  plan 
itself  in  all  its  comprehensiveness  and  minuteness,  and  tell  me 
if  it  be  not  utterly  at  variance  with  all  human  experience, 
and  in  itself  perfectly  incredible,  that  imposture  should  have 
conceived  such  a  scheme,  or  should  even  have  dared  to  com- 
mit its  course  to  a  venture  that  could  only  succeed  by  a  con- 
tinuance of  miraculous  fortune  through  all  ages  of  the  world. 
Consider  the  plan  itself,  the  various  minds  that  carried  on 
the  succession  of  its  several  predictions,  forming  a  line  of  holy 
men  from  the  earliest  periods  of  antediluvian  history  down 
to  the  last  of  the  apostles  of  Christ ;  see  how  they  all  agree 
in  spirit  and  purpose,  while  yet  so  different  in  character  and 
circumstances;  see  how  they  all  unite  in  testifying  of  Christ; 
so  that,  as  the  last  of  thein  said,  'the  testimony  of  Jesus  is 
the  spirit  of  prophecy ;'  then  tell  me  how  imposture  can  be 
supposed  to  have  wrought  unexposed  for  so  many  thousands 
of  years;  how  it  could  have  chosen  its  agents  out  of  forty 
centuries,  out  of  circumstances  so  disadvantageous,  and  bid 
them  embrace  such  an  immense  range  of  subjects  for  their 
predictions,  and  yet  without  any  inconsistency,  or  want  of 
harmony,  or  anything  incompatible  with  the  idea  of  one  all- 
pervading  mind  having  regulated  the  whole.  I  do  not  now 
say  that  so  much  as  one  prophecy  has  been  fuliilled;  I  only 
say,  and  I  challenge  all  denial,  that  not  a  single  prediction 
in  the  wdiole  succession  can  be  shown  to  have  failed,  or  to  be 
contradicted  by  the  times  or  events  to  which  it  referred ;  I 
only  assert  that,  while  many  of  the  prophecies  remain  unful- 
lilled,  because  the  times  they  relate  to  have  not  arrived,  a 
very  great  number  must  have  either  been  fulfilled  already,  or 
have  utterly  failed  ;  and  yet  no  unbeliever  could  ever  put  his 
hand  on  that  portion  of  history  which  contradicted  the  truth 
of  any.  I  ask  you  to  remember  this  important  and  undenia- 
ble fact,  and  then  say  whether  it  is  not  most  impressive  evi- 
dence that  another  mind  than  that  of  man  was  the  author  of 
the  prophecies  of  the  Bible  ;  whether  it  can  be  supposed  pos- 
sible, in  the  nature  of  things,  that  human  ingenuity  could 
have  contrived  a  volume  of  predictions  reaching  so  far, — 
extending  so  widely, — telling  so  much, — assuming  such  par- 


EVIDENCE   OF  PBOPHEGY.  375 

ticularitj,  without  having  been  contradicted  by  a  single  event 
in  the  history  of  nearly  six  thousand  years." 

This  eloquent  argument  of  Bishop  Mcllvaine  we  believe 
irresistible  in  its  appropriateness  and  its  truth.  The  most 
ingenious  skepticism  cannot  reply  to  the  negative  evidence  alone 
of  prophec}'.  Here  are  these  numerous  predictions  in  the 
Bible,  extending  over  the  whole  interval  of  time  that  marks 
the  existence  of  man  upon  this  earth.  Has  a  single  predic- 
tion been  proved  false?  Has  one  recorded  miracle,  one  pro- 
phecy, been  shown  a  failure?  We  challenge  the  whole  col- 
lege of  infidels  to  substantiate,  by  good  argument,  one  solitary 
instance  of  failure.  It  cannot  be  done.  The  united  skepti- 
cism of  the  world  has  never  yet  proved  false  a  single  recorded 
miracle  or  prediction  of  the  Scriptures.  Is  not  this  negative 
evidence,  saying  nothing  now  of  the  fact  of  fulfillment,  of 
immense  value  to  prove  the  Bible  from  God? 

What  greater  illustration  of  credulity  than  to  believe  this 
mighty  system  of  prophecy,  in  its  unity  and  minuteness  of 
detail,  to  be  the  work  alone,  through  so  many  ages,  of  unin- 
spired men,  and  yet  not  be  able  to  point  out  a  single  case  of 
failure ! 


CHAPTER   IX. 

PREDICTIONS    CONCERNING    CHRIST,  AND    BY    CHRIST. 

As  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  is  the  great  theme  of  all  reve- 
lation, so  we  find  that  all  prophecy,  in  its  main  scope,  centers 
upon  him.  Commencing  with  Adam,  in  Eden,  in  that 
memorable  prediction,  "The  seed  of  the  woman  shall  bruise 
the  serpent's  head,"  we  find  the  prophetic  delineations  of  the 
Messiah  that  was  to  come,  growing  clearer,  more  minute,  and 
more  grand  as  that  eventful  period  drew  nigh  when  the  Son  of 
God  was  to  become  incarnate  and  suffer  and  die  for  the  sins 
of  the  world.  Christ  not  only  based  the  truth  of  his  Messiah- 
fihip  upon  miracles,  but  upon  prophecy.  He  acknowledged  the 
inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament ;  he  rebuked  the  Pharisees 
for  corrupting  it  by  giving  undue  prominence  to  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  elders  ;  he  discoursed  to  the  people  from  the 
ancient  prophets,  and  constantly  turned  the  attention  of  the 
Jews  to  their  own  Scriptures,  as  atibrding  irresistible  evi- 
dence of  the  truth  of  his  Messiahship.  In  the  same  manner 
did  the  apostles  of  Christ  refer  to  the  Old  Testament  as  the 
strongest  proof  of  the  divine  mission  of  Christ.  With  such 
a  varied  and  great  number  of  predictions  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  respect  to  Christ,  we  can  only  select  a  very  few  ;  and 
the  illustrations  given  will  be  to  show  especially  one  feature 
of  prophecy,  which  is,  minuteness  of  specification.  We  shall 
say  nothing  of  the  comprehensiveness,  or  grandeur,  or  great 
variety  of  predictions,  in  respect  to  Christ,  that,  commencing 
from  the  earliest  age,  reach  to  the  last  hour  of  time.  It  is 
enough  for  our  purpose  if  we  show  from  the  wonderful 
minuteness  of  detail  the  impossibility  of  the  Scriptures 
being  the  production  alone  of  man.  Daniel,  five  hundred 
and  fifty-six  years  before  Christ,  determined  the  year  of  his 
coming, — when  four  hundred  and  ninety  years  should  be 
(3t6) 


PREDICTIONS   CONCERNING   CHRIST,  ETC.      377 

accomplished  from  the  going  forth  of  the  command  to  rebuild 
Jerusalem.  The  accurate  Dr.  Prideaux  has  established  that 
the  event  corresponded  with  the  prediction  exactly  to  a 
mouth.  For  in  the  month  jSTisan  was  the  decree  granted  to 
Ezra,  and  in  the  middle  of  iSTisan  Christ  suffered,  just  four 
liundred  and  ninety  years  after. 

Christ  was  predicted  to  come  into  the  world  at  that  very 
time  when  he  actually  did  come ;  and,  as  a  wonderful  con- 
firmation of  the  truth  of  the  predictions  of  the  prophets 
concerning  the  Messiah,  and  the  period  of  his  entrance  into 
the  world,  we  find  that  there  was,  not  only  in  Judea  but  in 
all  the  country  round  about,  a  universal  expectation  of  the 
appearance  of  this  Messiah.  This  is  seen  in  the  dismay  and 
concealed  envy  of  Ilerod  when  he  interrogated  the  chief 
priests  and  scribes  at  what  place  the  King  of  Israel  should 
be  born,  and  was  troubled  in  his  mind  when  they  told  him 
that  their  Scriptures  said,  in  Bethlehem  of  Judea.  It  is  seen, 
also,  in  his  command  to  massacre  the  infants  of  that  place, 
in  the  vain  hope  of  including  in  the  number  the  future  King 
of  Israel.  The  advent  of  Christ  into  the  world  was  at  the 
very  time  when  the  Jewish  mind  was  most  awake  to  his  actual 
coming,  and  when  they  thought  that  the  period  had  indeed 
come  when  the  predictions  concerning  him  would  be  accom- 
plished. Christ  was  predicted  to  be  betrayed  and  sold.  Ex- 
actly the  sum  ^vhich  Judas  covenanted  was  foretold.  Zecha- 
riah,  personifying  the  Saviour,  says  :  "  They  weighed  for  my 
price  thirty  pieces  of  silver."  The  very  use  of  this  money 
was  foretold  by  the  prophet:  "  And  the  Lord  said  unto  me. 
Cast  it  unto  the  potter ;  and  I  took  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver, 
and  cast  them  to  the  potter  in  the  house  of  the  Lord."  Thus 
Judas  cast  down  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  into  the  temple, 
and  the  money  was  applied  to  the  purchase  of  the  "  potter's 
field."  He  was  to  be  forsaken  by  his  disciples :  "  I  looked 
for  some  to  have  pity,  and  there  was  none  ;  and  for  comfort- 
ers, but  I  found  none."  The  place  of  his  birth  was  desig- 
nated by  Micah:  "But  thou,  Bethlehem  Ephratah,  though 
thou  be  little  among  the  thousands  of  Judah,  yet  out  of 
thee  shall  he  come  forth  unto  me  that  is  to  be  the  ruler  in 


378  rnh: DICTIONS  concerning  cubist, 

]si-iU'l  ;  whose  g-()iiii;s  forth  luivc  been  of  old,  i'roni  everlast- 
inii;."  And  in  Matthew  wo  read:  "Now  wlien  Jesus  was 
born  in  Bethlehem  of  Judea."  (vhrist  was  to  bo  preeeded  by 
a  remarkable  pei'son,  rosomblin"-  Elijah.  And  in  Isaiah  wo 
I'oad :  "The  voice  of  him  that  erioth  in  the  wilderness,  Tre- 
])are  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord,  make  straii;ht  in  the  desert  a 
hio-hway  for  onr  (lod."  In  Matthew  we  tind  the  fultillment, 
in  the  words  :  "  In  those  days  came  John  the  Baptist,  preach- 
ing in  the  wilderness  of  Judoa,  and  saying,  Repent  yo,  for 
the  kingdom  of  hea\'en  is  jit  hand."  lie  was  to  work  mira- 
cles, says  Isaiali  :  "Then  the  eyes  of  the  blind  shall  be 
openi'd,  and  the  ears  o['  the  deaf  shall  be  unstopped.  Then 
shall  the  lame  num  leap  as  an  hart,  and  the  tongue  of  the 
dumb  sing."  In  instances  too  numerous  to  mention,  these 
were  the  very  miracles  C^hrist  worked,  lie  was  to  be  rejected 
by  his  own  countrymen,  says  Isaiah  :  "And  he  shall  be  for  a 
sanctuaiT  ;  but  for  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  for  a  rock  of 
ollense  to  both  tlu'  houst's  ot'  Israel."  Says  dc>hn,  in  contir- 
inatit)n  :  "  lie  came  unto  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him 
not.''  l[o  was  to  be  scourged,  mocked,  and  spit  upon,  says 
Isaiah:  "•  1  gave  my  back  to  the  smiters,  and  my  cheeks  to 
them  that  plucked  otf  the  hair;  I  hid  not  my  face  from 
shame  and  s[)itting."  And  we  read  in  Matthew:  "Then 
did  they  spit  in  his  face,  and  buffeted  him ;  and  others 
smote  him  with  the  palms  ot'  their  hands."  His  hands  and 
feet  were  to  be  ]>ierced.  In  the  i'salms  we  read:  "The 
a8send)ly  oi'  the  wicd<ed  have  enclosed  me;  they  pierced  my 
liands  and  my  feet."  This  is  the  more  remarkable,  as  cru- 
citixion  was  a  punishment  not  known  among  the  Jews. 
lie  was  to  be  mocked  and  reviled  on  the  cross;  and  in  the 
Psalms  we  road:  "  All  they  tliat  see  me  laugh  me  to  scorn  ; 
they  slioot  out  the  lip;  thoy  shake  the  head,  saying,  lie 
trusted  on  the  Lord  that  he  would  deliver  him;  let  hiiii 
deliver  him,  seeing  he  delighted  in  him."  It  was  predicted 
that  his  garments  wore  to  bo  parted,  and  upon  his  vesture 
lots  wore  to  be  cast.  In  the  Psalms  wo  road:  "  They  part 
my  garments  among  them,  and  cast  lots  upon  my  vesture." 
And  in  John  we   road   of  the  fultillment,  when  the  soldiers 


AND   BV  CUBIST.  379 

said:  "Let  us  not  rend  it,  but  ca8t  lots  ibr  it,  whose  it  shidl 
be,"  while  his  garments  they  divided  into  four  parts.  He 
was  to  make  his  grave  with  the  rieh;  and  we  read  of  Joseph 
of  Arimathea  laying  the  body  of  Jesus  in  his  own  new  tomb, 
which  he  had  hewn  out  of  a  rock. 

Ill  the  Psalms  we  read  :  "  It  was  not  he  that  hated  me,  that 
did  magnify  himself  against  me;  then  I  would  have  hidmijSi{f 
from  him;  but  it  was  thou,  a  man,  my  equal,  my  guide,  and 
mine  acquaintance."  In  John  we  read:  "  And  Judas  also, 
which  betrayed  him,  fiiieiv  (he  phtce,  for  Jesus  ofttimes  resorted 
thither  with  his  disciples." 

In  Micah  we  read  :  "They  shall  smite  the  judge  of  Israel 
with  a  rod  upon  his  cheek."  In  Matthew  we  read  :  "They 
took  the  reed,  and  smote  him  on  the  head." 

In  the  Psalms  we  read:  "They  gave  me  also  gall  lor  my 
meat ;  and  in  my  thirst  they  gave  me  vinegar  to  drink  ;"  and 
in  Matthew  we  read:  "They  gave  him  vinegar  to  drink, 
mingled  with  gall."  In  the  Psalms  we  read:  "He  keepeth 
all  his  bones,  not  one  of  them  is  broken."  In  John  we  are 
told  :  "  These  things  were  done  that  the  Scripture  might  be 
fuliilled,  A  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken." 

In  Isaiah  we  read:  "He  was  numbered  with  the  trans- 
gressors." In  Luke  we  are  told  :  "  They  crucified  him,  and 
the  malefactors,  one  on  the  right  hand  and  the  other  on  the 
left." 

While  in  the  Psalms  we  read :  "  They  cast  lots  for  my 
vesture,"  in  John  we  are  told  the  reason  :  "  But  his  coat  was 
without  seam,  woven  from  the  top  throughout." 

Consider  the  predictions  of  Christ  himself.  Christ  pre- 
dicted his  own  resurrection  ;  and  yet  how  impossible  an  event 
of  this  nature,  unless  he  had  been  what  he  professed  to  be, 
the  Son  of  God  !  Christ  foretold  the  rapid  spread  of  the 
gospel;  the  persecutions  of  the  disciples;  the  precise  manner 
of  Peter's  martyrdom  ;  the  continuance  of  John  till  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  the  rejection  of  the  Jews;  and 
the  bringing  in  of  the  Gentiles  into  the  church  of  God.  But 
let  us  consider  the  predictions  of  Christ  in  respect  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem.     History  confirms,  in    the    most 


380  PREDICTIONS  CONCERNING    CHRIST, 

minute  particulars,  every  preclictiou  of  Christ.  Two  great 
historians,  Josephus  and  Tacitus, — tlie  one  a  Jew,  the  other 
a  Roman, — both  unfriendly  to  Christianity,  confirm  by  their 
united  testimony  the  predictions  of  Christ  respecting  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  and  the  subsequent  condition  of  the 
Jews.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  in  the  seventieth 
year  of  the  Christian  era ;  the  prophecies  of  Matthew  were 
published  thirty  years  before  fulfillment,  and  were  declared 
by  our  Saviour  thirty-seven  years  before  their  fulfillment. 
Observe  that  at  the  time  of  prediction  the  Jews  were  at  peace 
with  the  Romans,  the  temple  stood  in  all  its  glor}-,  and 
nothing  corresponded  with  the  fearful  calamities  foretold  by 
our  Saviour.  False  Christs  were  to  appear;  and  not  two 
years  after  the  crucifixion,  Simon  Magus  was  heard  boasting 
himself  as  the  Son  of  God  ;  and,  as  we  come  nearer  the  fatal 
event,  the  country  was  tilled  with  impostors,  who  deceived 
the  people.  Christ  also  predicted  famines,  and  pestilences, 
and  earthquakes  in  divers  places.  And  historians  speak  of  the 
raging  of  pestilences  in  various  places,  and  earthquakes,  as 
signs  of  the  times.  Christ  foretold  who  the  enemy  should  be, 
their  fury  and  power,  in  the  proverbial  expression  :  "  Whereso- 
ever the  carcass  is,  there  will  the  eagles  be  gathered  together,''  The  car- 
cass was  the  Jewish  nation,  given  over  as  thoroughly  corrupt 
and  forsaken  by  God.  The  eagles  were  the  characteristic  in- 
signia of  the  Romans.  The  means  by  which  Jerusalem  should 
be  taken  were  minutely  delineated.  "The  days  shall  come 
upon  thee,  that  thine  enemies  shall  cast  a  trench  about  thee, 
and  compass  thee  round,  and  keep  thee  in  on  every  side."  How- 
ever improbable  these  events,  they  actually  took  place.  The 
inhabitants  were  kept  in  Jerusalem  by  Titus,  with  a  wall  and 
trench  measuring  about  five  miles  in  circumference.  The 
ruin  of  the  city  was  foretold  in  these  words :  "  They  shall 
lay  thee  even  with  the  ground,  and  thy  children  within 
them ;  and  they  shall  not  leave  in  thee  one  stone  upon 
another  that  shall  not  be  thrown  down."  Jerusalem,  with 
its  massive  walls,  with  its  magnificent  temple,  was  totally 
demolished.  Terentius  Rufus,  a  captain  of  the  army  of 
Titus,  did  with  a  plowshare  beat  up  the  foundations  of  the 


AXD   BY  CHBIST.  381 

temple.     Says  Gibbon  :  "A  plowsbare  was  drawn  over  tbe 
consecrated  ground,  as  a  sign  of  perpetual  interdiction." 

Christ  predicted  of  tbe  Jews  :  "  They  shall  fall  by  the  edge 
of  the  sword,  and  shall  be  led  away  captive  into  all  nations." 
Josephus  computes  over  eleven  hundred  thousand  as  de- 
stroyed in  Jerusalem  alone,  and  upwards  of  one  million 
three  hundred  thousand  who  perished  during  these  days  of 
vengeance.  Over  ninety-seven  thousand  were  carried  into 
slavery,  beside  multitudes  banished  in  different  places.  But 
there  is  another  remarkable  prophecy  that  has  received  an 
exact  fulfillment.  "  Jerusalem  shall  be  trodden  down  of  the 
Gentiles,  until  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  be  fulfilled."  Nearly 
eighteen  hundred  years  have  elapsed  since  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  and  observe  that,  during  these  long  centuries,  the 
Jews  have  not  been  re-established  in  Jerusalem.  Romans, 
Saracens,  Christians,  Turks,  have  in  turn  possessed  and 
trodden  down  the  holy  city,  but  the  Jews,  strangers  in  their 
native  hxnd,  outcasts  in  the  home  of  their  fathers,  have  wan- 
dered over  the  earth,  a  persecuted,  despised,  but  distinct 
race  ;  mingling  with  every  nation,  but  uniting  with  none ;  a 
standing  miracle  of  preservation,  a  perpetual  monument  of 
the  truth  of  prophecy,  showing  the  Bible  from  God,  and 
proving  conclusively  the  divine  mission  of  Christ. 


CHAPTER   X. 

THE    SUCCESS    OF    CHRISTIANITY   IN   THE    FIRST    CENTURY. 

If  the  introduction  of  the  Mosaic  economy  demanded 
miracles,  the  introduction  of  tlie  Christian  dispensation  did 
much  more  demand  miracles.  There  were  greater  interests 
at  stake,  more  important  ends  to  be  accomplished,  and  far 
higher  obstacles  to  encounter.  The  divine  mission  of  Moses 
was  principally  to  educate  a  nation  in  the  unity  of  the  one 
(aod,  and  preserve  a  chosen  people  from  the  polytheism  of  a 
world  sunk  in  heathen  idolatry.  It  was  to  keep  for  the 
appointed  time  the  oracles  of  God  among  the  chosen  people, 
and  secure  a  moral  and  political  salvation  to  the  lineal  de- 
scendants of  Abraham.  But  the  introduction  of  Christianity 
was  to  break  down  the  separating  wall  between  Judaism  and 
Gentileism.  It  was  to  teach  new  doctrines,  make  more  clear 
the  old,  and  embrace  in  the  brotherhood  of  one  faith  not  one 
nation  only,  but  the  world.  It  was  not  in  Judea  only,  but  in 
every  land,  that  the  true  worshipers  were  to  be  publicly 
recognized  as  the  accepted  of  God.  The  gorgeous  ceremo- 
nial, the  ritualistic  service,  of  Judaism,  had  accomplished  the 
end  for  which  by  God  it  had  been  instituted.  All  typical 
sacrifices  were  consummated  in  the  great  antitype,  Christ, 
and  the  death  of  the  Son  of  God  had  introduced  a  new  era 
in  human  affairs.  Here  was  come  the  mighty  epoch  sung 
by  Jewish  bards.  Here  arose  in  the  world  that  event  of 
transcendent  interest  that  was  to  mould  the  destinies  of  every 
succeeding  age.  That  miracles  at  such  a  period  were  neces- 
sary to  confirm  the  divine  mission  of  Christ,  no  infidelity  can 
have  the  hardihood  to  deny.  That  they  were  really  worked, 
history,  both  sacred  and  profane,  combines  to  assure  the 
mind.  But  there  is  another  link  to  the  chain  of  evidence  to 
show  the  Bible  the  word  of  God.  •  That  link  is  the  success 
(382) 


TEE  SUCCESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY,  ETC.  383 

of  Christianity  during  the  first  century  that  elapsed  from  the 
death  of  its  divine  author.  The  argument  is  simply  this. 
The  success  of  Christianity  was  of  such  a  nature  that  no 
human  power  alone  is  an  adequate  reason  for  it.  Conse- 
quently it  must  be  from  God,  and  therefore  the  Bible,  that 
embodies  all  the  truth  of  Christianity,  is  from  God.  Both 
must  go  together.  The  divine  success  of  religion  cannot  be 
divorced  from  the  divine  record  of  that  religion.  If  the  one 
was  of  God,  the  other  must  also  be  of  God.  We  do  not  now 
enter  upon  the  subject  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  but 
onl}^  the  truth  of  the  divine  mission  of  Christ,  and  conse- 
quently the  divine  origin  of  his  doctrines  and  instructions. 

Let  us  consider  the  circumstances  that  existed  at  the  intro- 
duction of  Christianity,  and  the  obstacles  that  the  disciples 
of  Christ  had  to  encounter,  and  see  if  upon  the  principles  of 
human  reason  we  can  attribute  the  success  of  the  religion  of 
Christ  to  any  other  cause  than  the  power  of  God,  or  a  super- 
natural and  divine  agency.  There  are  some  things  which 
human  beings  can  and  will  do,  and  some  things  which  they 
either  cannot  do  or  will  not  do.  Men  act  from  motives.  Let 
us,  then,  see  if  the  success  of  Christianity  can  be  accounted 
for  upon  any  other  supposition  than  that  Christianity  was 
from  God.  The  introduction  of  Christianity  was  at  a  period 
of  the  world,  and  among  a  nation,  and  connected  with  such 
circumstances,  that  it  could  not  possibly  have  encountered 
successfully  the  obstacles  opposed  to  it,  had  not  Christianity 
been  from  God.  As  the  fabrication  of  man,  a  system  of  hu- 
man device,  it  must  have  been  strangled  in  its  very  cradle, 
and  expired  long  before  it  could  have  attracted  the  notice  of 
the  world.  One  great  reason  existed  for  this.  Christ  came 
in  a  way  and  under  those  circumstances  that  directly  arrayed 
against  him  the  whole  Jewish  nation.  Christ  assumed  titles, 
propounded  docrines,  and  denounced  judgment,  that  made 
him  peculiarly  unacceptable  to  his  countrymen.  The  learned 
men  of  the  nation,  looking  only  to  the  brilliant  predictions 
in  respect  to  his  second  coming  in  the  Old  Testament,  had 
confounded  his  first  coming  with  his  second  coming,  and  for- 
gotten the  necessar}'  humiliation   of  the  divine  author  of 


384  THE  SUCCESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

Christianity  in  the  regal  triumph  of  that  more  brilliant  epoch 
of  the  world's  history  when  Christ  shall  assume  distinctively 
to  the  world's  gaze  the  attributes  of  a  judge  and  a  king.  But, 
more  than  this,  the  Jews  not  only  had  lost  sight  of  the  pre- 
dictions in  respect  to  Christ's  humiliation,  hut  had  carnalized 
all  true  ideas  of  the  glory  of  Christ  as  a  king  and  a  judge. 
They  fell  into  the  twofold  error  of  overlookino-  the  humili- 
ation  of  his  first  coming  and  Judaizing  his  second  coming. 
Upon  every  principle  of  reason,  then,  the  mission  of  Christ 
to  the  Jews,  if  not  divine,  would  be  accommodated  to  the  pre- 
judices and  feelings  of  the  Jews.  If  Christ  was  not  of  God, 
he  neither  would  nor  could  have  set  himself  against  every 
prospect  of  worldly  success,  and  perseveringly  taken  a  course 
that  ended  only  in  ignominy  and  death  and  the  deprivation 
of  all  that  is  held  valuable  upon  the  earth.  One  of  two  things 
is  certain, — Christ  was  of  this  world,  or  he  was  not ;  he  came 
as  the  divinely  accredited  messenger  of  God,  or  he  did  not 
thus  come.  What  worldly  motive  could  influence  Christ  to 
take  the  course  he  did  take  ?  All  conduct  must  be  based 
upon  motives.  If  Christ  was  not  divinely  commissioned  by 
God,  he  must  be  of  this  world.  His  mission,  and  his  claims 
to  be  believed  in  as  sent  of  God,  must  be  either  true  or  false. 
There  is  no  middle  ground  between  a  heavenly  Messiah  and 
a  worldly  impostor. 

The  last  supposition  gives  us  the  absurd  anomaly  of  an  indi- 
vidual actuated  b}-  worldly  motives,  and  yet  in  his  whole  life 
and  death  taking  a  course  that  in  the  clearest  and  most 
effectual  way  -^as  directly  opposed  to  all  worldly  advance- 
ment, all  that  is  honored  or  considered  as  pleasant  and  de- 
sirable by  this  world ;  a  citizen  alone  of  this  earth,  influ- 
enced as  an  impostor  by  worldly  motives,  and  yet  in  every 
act  of  his  life  taking  the  very  course  that  no  man  of  the  world 
will  take,  courting  poverty,  suffering,  disgrace,  death,  and  all 
for  that  which  was  false, — an  impostor  doing  that  which 
promised  neither  the  favor  of  God  nor  of  man,  which  could 
secure  neither  the  riches  of  time  nor  eternity.  Human  nature 
is  made  up  of  no  such  kind  of  material  as  that.  No  axiom  in 
mathematics  more  true  than  that  motives  will  correspond  to 


IX  THE  FIBST  CENTUBY.  385 

the  conduct  pursued.  For  a  man  from  God  to  act  a  whole 
lifetime  like  an  impostor,  or  an  impostor  like  a  man  from 
God, — for  a  person  influenced  by  worldly  motives  perse- 
veringly  to  live  and  die  against  worldly  motives, — is  the 
greatest  of  all  absurdities.  It  is  to  suppose  a  criterion  of  con- 
duct that  the  human  heart  never  can  adopt. 

But  consider  the  conduct  of  the  Jews  toward  Christ.  All 
their  cherished  hopes  of  an  earthly  potentate  were  studiousl}^ 
defeated  by  Christ.  His  cradle  was  the  manger  of  oxen,  his 
occupation  that  of  the  carpenter's  son.  His  sympathies  were 
with  the  despised  of  his  race.-  His  instructions  constantly  re- 
buked their  pride,  conflicted  with  all  their  ideas  of  worldly 
supremacy,  threw  contempt  upon  their  priesthood,  abrogated 
their  ritual,  and  waged  a  constant  war  with  their  cherished 
exclusiveness  as  a  nation.  Christ  promised  nothing  that  was 
not  most  offensive  to  all  influenced  by  earthly  motives.  A 
most  expressive  term  embodies  the  appearance  of  Christ  to 
his  nation, — ^^  stumbling -block ."  The  conduct  of  the  Jews 
toward  Christ  evinced  that  he  was  looked  upon  peculiarly 
as  a  stumbling-block.  Xo  matter  how  clear  the  proofs  of  his 
divine  mission,  that  mission  itself  was  hateful  in  the  extreme  to 
the  Jewish  nation.  ISTo  one  fact  in  history  is  so  clearly  proved 
as  this.  What  inference  more  natural,  than  that  if  Christ  was 
only  an  impostor  and  did  not  come  from  God,  his  mission 
would  die  upon  the  same  cross  that  witnessed  his  death  ?  Not 
only  is  such  an  inference  what  all  men  in  reason  would  make, 
but  an  inference  certain  to  be  verified  by  the  actual  results. 
But  what  was  the  fact?  The  success  of  Christianity  was  a 
success  precisely  under  those  circumstances  that  declared  it 
to  be  from  God. 

Amid  a  nation's  scoffs,  in  ignominy  and  fearful  pain,  the 
great  author  of  Christianity  had  died  upon  the  cross,  j^o  day 
of  gloom  like  that  in  human  history  !  Christ's  body  was 
committed  to  the  grave ;  his  disciples,  disconsolate,  had  dis- 
persed ;  few  and  despised,  they  possessed  in  themselves  not 
one  element  of  strength.  Regarded  as  the  victims  of  a  mis- 
erable delusion,  they  were  scattered,  with  no  bond  of  union, 
and  had  no  other  protection  than  the  world's  contempt  and 

25 


386  THE  SUCCESS   OF  CHBISTIANITY 

their  own  poverty  and  destitution  of  power  and  fame.  Who 
but  God  was  to  resuscitate  those  ahnost  extinguished  fires 
of  Christianity?  It  seemed  as  if  every  combination  of  cir- 
cumstance had  been  brought  together  to  show  the  impotence 
of  human  power,  and  the  perfect  helplessness  of  the  disciples 
of  Christ  in  every  earthly  point  of  view.  But  mark  what 
followed.  Upon  the  fiftieth  day  after  the  death  of  Christ, 
before  a  great  assembly  of  Jews  and  strangers  from  other 
nations,  Peter,  one  of  the  disciples,  arose  and  addressed  the 
multitude.  Notice  the  character  of  his  speech,  and  its  eflect 
upon  the  assembly : 

"  Jesus  of  l!^azareth  (said  Peter),  being  delivered  by  the  de- 
terminate counsel  and  foreknowledge  of  God,  ye  have  taken, 
and  by  wicked  hands  have  crucified  and  slain  :  whom  God 
hath  raised  up.  Therefore  let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know 
assuredl}^,  that  God  hath  made  that  same  Jesus,  whom  ye 
have  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ." 

Upon  the  supposition  that  Christ  was  of  this  world,  and 
consequently  not  raised  from  the  dead,  what  madness  to  utter 
such  language  !  How  could  the  deluded  disciple  of  a  false 
Messiah  boldly  charge  home  upon  the  Jews  a  crime  of  which 
they  were  guiltless,  even  the  crucifixion  of  the  Son  of  God, 
or  dare  avow  an  event  so  miraculous  as  his  resurrection,  if  it 
had  not  taken  place  ?  Surrounded  by  a  nation  of  unbe- 
lievers, with  the  whole  Jewish  hierarchy  as  enemies  most 
bitter,  how  happened  it  that  Peter  (if  Christ  was  not  of  God) 
presumed  to  utter  an  untruth  at  the  time  when  detection 
was  inevitable  and  exposure  certain  ?  But  what  was  the 
result  ?  Three  thousand  souls  were  that  day  added  to  the 
infant  Church. 

Observe,  then,  the  success  that  ensued  from  that  day. 
Twelve  apostles  are  sent  forth,  to  achieve  a  far  mightier  vic- 
tory than  the  military  conquest  of  the  earth.  They  enter  upon 
a  warfare  that  brings  to  them  neither  riches,  nor  earthly 
honors,  nor  ease.  And  who  are  these  twelve  apostles  ?  They 
are  not  famed  for  learning,  they  have  no  wealth,  they  com- 
mand no  force  of  arms.  They  enter  upon  this  enterprise,  ob- 
scure, friendless,  simple,  unprotected  men,  despised  by  the 


IX   THE  FIRST  CENTUBT.  387 

noble  and  great,  iinhonored  by  the  multitude,  and  unloved 
by  the  people.     What  do  they  propose  to  do  ? 

It  is  the  subversion  of  Judaism,  an  uncompromising  hostility 
to  the  idols  o^  the  heathen,  an  open,  life-long  war  with  every 
embodiment  of  evil,  be  it  in  the  individual  or  the  state. 
What  apostles  of  any  other  religion  ever  proposed  to  them- 
selves such  a  task  ?  And  yet  these  twelve  men,  mostly  fish- 
ermen, dare  attempt  a  task  more  formidable  than  ever  yet 
entered  the  heart  of  man. 

Consider  the  state  of  the  world  at  that  time.  The  Roman 
Empire  was  master  of  the  earth.  The  imperial  eagle  floated 
on  every  banner,  and  the  remotest  regions  of  the  civilized 
world  acknowledged  the  supremacy  of  Csesar.  But  Rome 
was  one  vast  superstructure  of  idolatry.  The  civil  and  the 
religious  code  were  intimately  blended  together,  and  pagan- 
ism embodied  in  itself  all  the  wealth  and  power  of  the  earth. 
The  worship  of  idols  was  the  law  of  the  state,  and  disobedi- 
ence was  branded  with  infamy  and  subjected  to  torture  and  to 
death.  It  was  also  the  most  enlightened  age  of  the  world. 
Not  only  was  all  the  idolatry  of  the  earth  arrayed  against 
Christianity,  but  all  its  boasted  philosophy.  On  one  side  was 
all  the  formalism  of  Judaism,  and  upon  the  other  all  the 
grossness  of  heathenism,  both  arrayed  in  deadly  issue  with 
the  new  religion. 

Upon  what  principle,  then,  unless  it  be  the  supernatural 
intervention  of  God,  an  agency  infinitely  superior  to  human 
instrumentality,  are  we  to  account  for  the  success  of  the 
apostles  ?  Be  it  remembered,  the  weapons  of  their  warfare 
were  not  carnal,  but  spiritual.  They  had  no  rank,  no  riches, 
no  military  power,  to  recommend  them.  They  disclaimed  all 
such  instrumentality.  Mohammed  achieved  his  victories  b}' 
the  sword,  and  offered  a  paradise  of  sensualism  to  his  fol- 
lowers. But  the  apostles  of  Christ  held  no  sword  in  their 
hands,  and  offered  to  their  disciples  in  this  life  nothing  but 
the  loss  of  all  that  the  earth  esteems  valuable  or  pleasant. 
They  held  up,  indeed,  a  crown  of  beauty  and  glory;  but  it 
was  of  heaven,  not  of  this  earth. 

Such  was  the  greatness  of  the  task  imposed  upon  the  apos- 


§88  THE  SUCCESS   OF  CHRISTIANITY 

ties.  Do  thej  hesitate  to  undertake  it?  Far  from  it.  The 
very  disciples  that  fled  upon  the  trial  of  their  Master,  and 
the  apostle  who  trembled  before  the  poor  words  of  a  woman 
in  the  hall  of  judgment,  boldly  take  upon  thertiselves  a  war- 
fare against  a  world  lying  in  sin,  whose  field  of  battle  was 
in  every  land,  and  protracted  as  long  as  life  itself;  and  what 
was  their  success  ?  "And  the  word  of  God  increased ;  and 
the  number  of  the  disciples  multiplied  in  Jerusalem  greatly; 
and  a  great  company  of  the  priests  were  obedient  to  the 
faith."  The  Christian  religion  was  not  confined  to  Judea. 
Its  disciples  penetrated  far  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Roman 
Empire.  Multitudes  daily  were  added  to  the  church.  In 
Rome  itself,  in  the  palace  of  the  Caesars,  the  gospel  was 
preached.  In  famed  Corinth,  abandoned  to  every  vice,  be- 
lievers were  found.  At  Athens  the  voice  of  Paul  was  heard. 
For  the  first  time  desert  lands  saw  the  banner  of  the  cross, 
and  lonely  forests  resounded  with  the  hymn  of  Jesus.  Before 
thirty  years  had  elapsed  from  the  death  of  Christ,  churches 
were  planted  throughout  Judea,  Galilee,  and  Samaria,  through 
Greece,  the  islands  of  the  -r^gcan  Sea,  the  sea-coast  of  Africa, 
and  far  into  Italy. 

The  number  of  converts  is  described  as  "a  great  number," 
"great  multitudes,"  "much  people."  The  opposers  of 
Christianity  at  Thessalonica  exclaim  against  the  apostles, 
"  that  they  who  had  turned  the  vjorld  upside  down,  were  come 
hither  also."  Demetrius  complained  of  Paul,  "  that  not  only 
at  Ephesus,  but  also  throughout  all  Asia,  he  had  persuaded 
and  turned  away  much  people."  Jerusalem,  the  chief  seat 
of  Jewish  bigotry,  had  in  it  many  thousands  of  believers.  The 
Christians,  by  the  testimony  of  Tacitus,  had  become  so  nu- 
merous at  Rome  that  a  "  great  multitude  were  seized."  In 
forty  years  more  we  are  told,  in  a  celebrated  letter  of  Pliny 
the  Roman  Governor  of  Pontus  and  Bithynia,  that  Christi- 
anity had  long  subsisted  in  these  provinces,  though  so  remote 
from  Judea;  also,  that  "  many  of  all  ages  and  of  every  rank, 
of  both  sexes,  likewise,  were  accused  to  Pliny  of  being 
Christians."  Justin  Martyr,  who  wrote  one  hundred  years 
after  the  gospel  was  first  preached  to  the  Gentiles,  thus  de- 


LV  THE  FIRST  CENTUBY.  389 

scribes  the  extent  of  Christianity  in  his  time  :  "  There  is  not 
a  nation,  either  Greek  or  barbarian,  or  of  any  other  name, 
even  of  those  who  wander  in  tribes  and  live  in  tents,  among 
whom  prayers  and  thanksgivings  are  not  offered  to  the  Father 
and  Creator  of  the  universe  by  the  name  of  the  crucified 
Jesus."  Of  the  converts,  even  Gibbon  unites  in  this  testi- 
mony:  "As  they  emerged  from  sin  and  superstition  to  the 
glorious  hope  of  immortality,  they  resolved  to  devote  them- 
selves to  a  life  not  only  of  virtue,  but  of  penitence  ;  the 
desire  of  perfection  became  the  ruling  passion  of  their 
soul." 

But  not  less  remarkable  was  the  success  of  Christianity  in 
the  first  century  than  formidable  the  opposition  encountered. 
Eome  became  alarmed  for  her  idols.  Superstition  trembled 
on  her  throne.  The  great  men  of  the  earth  were  combined 
against  the  cross.  Of  the  twelve  apostles,  all  but  one  died 
martj'rs  to  tlie  faith ;  and  even  the  beloved  John,  in  his  last 
days,  was  banished  to  the  lonely  Patmos. 

The  first  apostles  of  Mohammed  all  entered  into  earthly 
honors  and  became  chieftains  over  the  conquered  realms  of 
their  master;  but  the  apostles  of  Christ  were  imprisoned, 
tortured,  and  persecuted  unto  death.  Their  baptism  was  a 
baptism  of  blood.  To  the  contumely  of  a  world,  the  bitter 
rage  of  incensed  Judaism  and  pagan  craft,  were  they  con- 
stantly exposed.  Weary,  abandoned,  desolate,  with  hunger, 
and  cold,  and  want,  unrewarded  by  riches,  ease,  or  honor, 
they  pursued  their  toilsome  journej^  over  land  and  sea, — 
harmless  as  their  Master,  they  found  no  resting  place.  They 
spoke  before  princes  and  kings ;  but  paganism,  wielding 
the  power  of  the  state,  exerted  all  her  might  to  crush  the 
religion  of  the  cross.  Upon  the  rack  innumerable  men  and 
women  and  children  were  tortured, — infants  were  cast  into 
the  fire, — all  that  the  dungeon,  the  stake,  the  wild  beasts  of 
the  circus  could  do,  was  tried ;  and  yet  victory  and  the  cross  did 
but  go  together.  In  prisons  dark,  in  the  raging  flame,  upon 
the  bed  of  torture,  before  the  ferocious  beasts  of  the  amphi- 
theater, did  the  song  of  the  martyr  arise,  and  a  brighter  crown 
than  the  Csesars  ever  wore  glittered  before  the  eye  of  the 


390  THE  SUCCESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY,  ETC. 

persecuted  disciple  of  Christ.  lu  his  ear  he  heard  a  sweeter 
minstrelsy  than  ever  echoed  in  Diana's  temple  or  arose  from 
the  assembled  multitude  of  the  Parthenon. 

The  imposing  system  of  paganism  fell  before  the  purity  of 
the  religion  of  Christ ;  and  yet  the  only  weapons  were  truth 
and  love.  Such  was  the  success  of  Christianity.  Keasou  as 
we  may  and  believe  as  we  may,  the  fact  that  it  was  from 
God,  and  not  of  man,  was  supernatural  in  its  origin,  and  not 
natural,  was  accompanied  by  miracles  and  enforced  by  the 
eternal  Spirit,  is  the  only  thing  that  can  explain  the  mission 
of  Christ,  the  power  of  his  instructions,  and  the  success  of 
his  apostles. 

Take  away  from  us  this  argument,  and  these  great  events, 
never  to  be  effaced  from  the  page  of  history,  will  present  to 
skepticism  an  anomaly  of  absurdity,  a  contradiction  in  all  the 
principles  of  human  life,  so  strange  that  even  a  thousand 
miracles  would  be  far  more  easy  to  credit  than  a  supposition 
so  unnatural. 

The  success  of  Christianity  during  the  first  century,  under 
obstacles  so  great  and  in  conflict  with  prejudices  so  invete- 
rate, carries  with  it  evidence  most  conclusive  of  the  divine 
origin  of  the  religion  of  Christ.  The  age  when  our  Saviour 
came  into  the  world  was  peculiarly  unfavorable  to  any 
attempt  to  palm  off  upon  the  credulity  of  the  multitude  a 
system  of  imposture.  It  was  just  the  age  to  test  most  clearly 
the  reality  of  miracles,  and  displayed  to  the  greatest  advan- 
tage the  truthfulness  of  the  divine  mission  of  the  Son  of 
God.  It  was  the  supernatural  character  of  that  mission,  and 
its  holy  credentials  from  God  himself,  that  carried  with  it  the 
convictions  of  its  disciples  and  made  it  triumph  over  all 
obstacles. 


CHAPTER   XL 

ADAPTATION    OF    THE    BIBLE    TO    HUMAN    NATURE    AND    THE 
CONSCIENCE. 

When  the  great  fact  is  shown  that  we  need  a  revelation 
from  God,  when  the  mind  assents  to  this  clearest  of  truths, 
then  are  we  in  afiivorahle  condition  to  go  directly  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  evidences  of  Christianity.  Let  us,  then, 
take  the  Bible  and  carefully  examine  its  credentials.  Let  us 
thoroughly  investigate  its  proofs  demanding  our  belief  and 
proclaiming  itself  from  God.  The  Bible  invites  us  to  such 
an  examination, — it  seeks  to  impose  no  belief  that  is  not 
based  upon  the  highest  interests  of  our  nature,  and  that  has 
not  to  support  it  arguments  of  irresistible  strength  and  im- 
portance. LTnlike  all  pretended  revelations,  it  is  open  to  the 
freest  and  the  most  searching  scrutiny.  Coming  to  us  with 
its  tremendous  sanctions,  it  demands  our  most  careful,  most 
earnest,  and  most  faithful  examination.  It  has  nothing  to 
conceal  in  respect  to  its  credentials.  It  seeks  not  to  impose 
a  faith  without  reason,  or  a  practice  without  evidence.  It 
calls  not  upon  us  to  believe  in  its  divine  origin  without 
giving  the  clearest  proofs  that  it  comes  from  God.  Let  us, 
then,  commence  the  task  of  an  examination  whether  the 
Bible  is  in  truth  a  revelation  from  God,  and  an  authoritative 
standard  of  belief  and  practice.  But  in  what  attitude  shall 
we  present  ourselves?  Shall  we  go  as  learners?  Shall  we 
come  willing  to  receive  the  truth?  Let  us  remember,  we 
must  be  deeply  committed  to^our  own  personal  interests. 
Our  belief  or  no  belief  will  not  change  the  immutable  sanc- 
tions of  the  Bible,  Our  own  opinions,  right  or  wrong,  will 
not  alter  one  fact  of  inspiration.  If  the  Bible  is  from  God, 
it  will  stand   immovable  as  the   throne  of  Jehovah,  even 

(391) 


392  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

thouffh  orenerations  of  unbelievers  treat  it  as  a  fable.  But  there 
is  one  argument,  before  entering  upon  the  evidences  of  Chris- 
tianity, that  we  have  the  right  to  make  the  most  of.  What 
may  affect  our  personal  interests  for  time  and  eternity  should 
be  attentively  studied,  and  every  evidence  given  for  its  truth 
should  be  received  with  candor.  It  should  make  a  great  dif- 
ference with  a  person  who  is  told  of  the  danger  of  a  river  that 
he  must  cross,  and  that  of  one  which  he  has  not  to  cross. 
Belief  in  the  one  affects  his  personal  interests,  but  belief  in 
the  other  does  not.  It  is  of  little  consequence  what  his  belief 
may  be  of  one  river;  while  his  personal  safety  depends  upon 
a  correct  belief  in  the  other  case.  Apply  the  same  reasoning 
to  the  Bible.  True  or  not  true,  our  own  interests  are  inti- 
mately involved.  If  true,  it  is  the  charter  of  a  glorious  im- 
mortality beyond  the  grave ;  if  not  true,  we  are  shut  up 
alone  to  the  unassisted  light  of  nature,  with  all  its  deepening 
gloom  and  fearful  intimations  of  ruin.  Now,  such  a  subject 
is  not  to  be  treated  as  we  treat  the  facts  of  science  or  the 
mere  discoveries  of  human  knowledge.  He  who  plows  the 
land  may  believe  in  either  the  Ptolemaic  or  the  Copernican 
system  of  astronomy,  but  he  will  get  as  good  a  harvest  whether 
he  believes  the  sun  moves  round  the  earth  or  the  earth  round 
the  sun  ;  but  it  is  a  very  different  thing  with  him  whether  he 
believes  the  Bible  is  from  God,  or  the  offspring  of  human 
craft  and  simply  a  fable.  As  a  wrong  belief  in  the  Bible  is 
made  a  subject  of  condemnation,  so  the  interests  of  the  unbe- 
liever are  affected  for  time  and  eternity  by  the  feet  alone  of 
his  unbelief.  This  is  the  reason  why  it  is  so  needful  for  us 
to  consider  the  evidences  of  Christianity.  What  conclusion, 
then,  are  we  to  arrive  at  in  respect  to  the  evidence  that  the 
Bible  comes  from  God?  Just  the  conclusion  that  we  arrive 
at  from  any  evidence  in  respect  to  those  things  which  affect 
our  interests  for  this  life  alone.  We  take  such  evidence  as 
presents  itself,  great  or  small,  and  make  the  most  of  it.  All 
human  action  in  worldly  things  is  based  upon  this.  The 
practical  rule  of  all  our  conduct  is  action,  whenever  the  evi- 
dence of  a  thing  exceeds  the  evidence  against  a  thing.  What 
demonstrative  Droof  has  the  merchant,  who  commits  histrea- 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE    CONSCIENCE.     393 

sures  to  the  treacherous  sea,  that  he  shall  ever  see  the  vessel 
in  which  his  riches  are  embarked?  And  yet  how  little  evidence 
is  necessary  to  induce  thousands,  with  sufficient  reason,  to  do 
bushiess  upon  the  great  waters  !  Of  the  millions  who  now 
travel  by  the  mysterious  agency  of  steam,  how  many  person- 
ally examine  that  swift  engine  that  brings  them  in  safety  to 
their  journey's  end?  What  but  probable  evidence,  and  that, 
too,  of  a  very  limited  nature,  controls  our  conduct  in  most  of 
the  atfairs  of  this  life  ?  Principles  of  action  that  all  in  this 
world  confess  to  be  reasonable  and  good,  many  disavow  when 
a  revelation  from  God  is  presented.  In  this  life  many  scruple 
not  to  risk  everything  upon  the  feeblest  testimony,  and  yet 
no  testimony,  however  great,  will  induce  them  to  believe  the 
Bible.  Every  difficulty  is  magnified  into  a  mountain,  and 
the  smallest  objections  are  made  to  offset  the  most  irresistible 
arguments  in  favor  of  a  divine  revelation.  Believing  in  the 
great  facts  of  nature  upon  evidence  the  most  feeble,  they  dis- 
believe the  God  of  nature  in  his  inspired  word  upon  evidence 
the  most  grand  and  conclusive.  Works  of  human  produc- 
tion they  receive  with  unhesitating  confidence,  while  the  in- 
spired words  of  God  are  treated  with  contempt  and  neglect. 
Thousands  admitting  the  existence  and  exploits  of  Alexan- 
der, or  Cffisar,  or  IsTapoleon,  with  a  confidence  the  most  im- 
plicit, yet  doubt  or  deny  the  divine  mission  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  his  atonement  for  sin,  although  sustained  by  the  accu- 
mulated evidence  of  centuries  and  made  memorable  by  the 
blood  of  unnumbered  martyrs.  How  shall  we  account  for 
this  ?  Simply  upon  the  ground  that  in  one  case  our  personal 
interests  are  aflfected,  and  in  the  other  they  are  not.  To  admit 
the  truth  of  the  Bible  is  to  admit  its  divine  sanctions,  and  to 
believe  that  it  comes  from  God  is  also  to  believe  in  the  con- 
demnation that  it  pronounces  upon  its  rejection.  Here  lies 
the  secret  of  that  infidelity  that  would  do  away  with  the 
Bible,  and  consequently  with  its  sanctions.  Here  is  the  cause 
of  that  sophistry  that  would  reject  inspired  truth  because  of 
the  personality  of  its  application.  Yet  the  very  fact  that  our 
interests  are  intimately  involved  in  our  belief  or  disbelief  of 
the  Bible,  is  the  highest  reason  for  a  most  earnest  and  faith- 


394  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

ful  examinatiou  of  its  evidences.  The  very  fact  that  our  des- 
tiuy  for  eternity  may  be  at  stake,  is  the  most  convincing  of 
arguments  to  induce  us  to  treat  with  candor  every  proof  that 
the  Bible  comes  from  God.  Here  we  take  our  stand.  We 
say,  be  the  evidences  great  or  small  for  the  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  that  evidence,  if  good,  should  be  received  such 
as  it  is,  and  the  most  made  of  it. 

We  come  now  to  the  Bible,  and  inquire  if  this  book,  which 
professes  to  be  from  God,  is  adapted  to  our  nature.  Does  it 
meet  the  demands  of  our  moral  constitution  ?  Is  it  in  all 
respects  suited  to  be  our  guide  in  this  world  to  a  better  ?  If 
not,  then  the  evidence  of  miracles  and  prophecy  must,  with 
us,  have  little  weight ;  if  its  representations  of  our  state  are 
erroneous  and  its  general  character  destitute  of  purity  or 
veracity,  we  say  such  a  work  cannot  be  the  offspring  of  a 
good  and  holy  God.  God  cannot  be  the  author  of  that  which 
belies  his  nature  or  throws  contempt  upon  his  attributes  of 
truth  and  holiness. 

But  we  say  more  than  this  :  it  is  impossible  that  the  record 
of  miracles  and  prophecy  should,  under  such  circumstances, 
be  a  true  record,  as  God  only  can  work  miracles  and  pre- 
dict events  to  take  place  hundreds  and  thousands  of  years 
before  their  actual  occurrence.  So,  also,  a  Bible  of  the  char- 
acter described  would  be  impossible  to  be  substantiated  by 
genuine  miracles  and  prophecy;  for  God  never  would  work 
miracles  for  an  end  unworthy  of  himself. 

But  if  we  find  the  Bible  is  adapted  to  our  nature,  as  the 
key  is  adapted  to  the  lock, — if  we  see  that  it  presents  a  per- 
fect model  of  purity,  love,  and  goodness  for  imitation, — if  it 
reflects  like  a  mirror  our  condition,  and  combines  every  ex- 
cellence to  attract  the  mind, — if  it  suits  us  in  every  condition 
of  life,  and  has  in  all  ages  and  every  land  an  adaptation  to 
our  necessities, — if  it  delineates  God  as  the  universal  Father, 
caring  equally  for  the  humblest  as  the  greatest  of  beings, — 
if  it  shows  the  infinite  love  of  Christ  his  Son,  and  reveals  an 
atonement  for  the  sins  of  the  world, — if  it  unfolds  a  redemp- 
tive process  commencing  from  the  earliest  age  and  consum- 
mated in  the  salvation  of  millions  of  the  human  race, — if  it 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE   CONSCIENCE.     395 

discloses  the  law  honored  and  the  sinner  saved,  justice  and 
mercy  meeting  together, — if  at  every  period  of  our  lives  it 
has  something  fitted  for  our  instruction,  and  can  adapt  itself 
to  every  variety  of  intellect,  and  give  lessons  of  wisdom  to 
the  peasant-boy  and  the  king,  to  the  young  and  the  aged, — 
if  to  every  faculty  of  our  nature  it  giv^es  out  a  note  of  har- 
mony, and  insinuates  itself  into  all  the  intricacies  of  our 
moral  being,  then  do  we  have  the  most  convincing  proof  that 
such  a  book  must  come  from  God. 

Let  us,  then,  examine  the  Bible,  to  see  if  it  is  adapted  to 
our  nature, — if  it  unlocks  the  door  of  our  hearts.  "We 
will  commence  with  conscience.  Does  the  Bible  meet 
the  demands  of  our  conscience?  Do  its  truths  alone 
give  peace  to  the  conscience  and  a  ground  of  firm  support  ? 
Search  the  world  over,  and  we  find  that  no  religion  but 
that  of  the  Bible  can  satisfy  the  conscience,  or  meet  its 
boundless  wants.  It  belongs  to  the  intellect  to  tell  us  what 
is  true,  but  the  conscience  has  the  prerogative  alone  of  telling 
us  what  is  right;  its  decisions  are  immediate  and  intuitive. 
What  is  there  in  the  Bible  that  the  conscience  can  show  is 
wrong?  Look  to  the  morality  of  revelation.  What  is  there 
in  it  that  conscience  does  not  approve  of?  What  purity  of 
thought,  as  of  overt  act,  is  commanded  in  the  Bible  !  What 
moral  excellence  is  there  that  conscience  does  not  respond  to 
as  most  noble  and  worthy  of  God  ? 

Consider,  then,  in  what  respects  the  Bible  is  adapted  to  the 
conscience.  It  is  peculiarly  adapted  to  it  in  its  decisions  'of 
what  is  morally  good  and  right.  It  is  not  in  the  power  of 
the  intellect  to  make  what  is  in  itself  wrong  right,  or  to  turn 
right  into  wrong.  There  is  an  essential  difference  in  our  per- 
ceptions of  what  is  true  and  right,  and  that  which  is  false  and 
wrong.  The  Bible  is  distinguished  above  all  other  books  in 
that  pre-eminently  it  is  addressed  to. the  conscience.  It  comes 
to  this  noblest  of  our  faculties,  and  speaks  directly  to  the 
deepest  convictions  of  our  moral  nature.  It  dehueates  the 
character  of  God  in  such  a  light  that  conscience,  if  it  dreads 
divine  justice,  yet  responds  immediate!}^  to  the  truthfulness 
of  its  exhibition.     It  delineates  the  purity  of  God  and  his  be- 


396  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

nevolence  in  such  a  way  that  couscience  at  once  pronounces 
a  verdict  of  approbation. 

There  are  certain  moral  duties  so  plain,  so  needful,  and  so 
imperious  in  their  obligation,  that  when  clearly  exhibited  to 
the  njind  there  will  be  a  response  from  conscience  of  appro- 
bation, from  the  most  degraded  even  as  the  most  exalted  of 
men.  Thus,  sinceritj'  and  truth  in  our  intercourse  with  so- 
ciety,— thus,  self-denial  for  others'  good, — thus,  the  possession 
of  a  just  and  benevolent  spirit, — thus,  the  shunning  of  treach- 
ery, mui'der,  or  violence  upon  the  property  or  character  of 
our  neighbor, — thus,  uprightness  in  our  daily  intercourse,  and 
freedom  from  avarice,  revenge,  and  deceit, — thus,  kindness 
toward  the  helpless,  affection  to  parents  or  children,  are  duties 
as  universal  as  man,  all  growing  out  of  the  great  law  of  love, 
as  boundless  in  its  extent  as  the  universe  of  God. 

All  these  duties  are  enforced  in  the  Bible  in  a  way  pecu- 
liar for  the  greatness  of  their  sanctions  and  the  clearness  of 
their  application.  What  does  conscience  do  when  appealed 
to  by  these  duties  of  the  word  of  God?  Conscience  pro- 
nounces them  right.  It  has  no  long  process  of  argument  to 
go  through  with,  no  complicated  series  of  questions  to  ask. 
Conscience  at  once  says.  These  duties  are  right,  these  duties 
promote  our  noblest  interests,  these  duties  we  must  comply 
with  or  we  endanger  our  immortal  happiness.  Nor  does  it 
demand  a  mind  educated  in  the  schools,  or  learned  in  the 
arts  and  sciences.  In  the  heart  of  the  most  ignorant,  the 
simplest,  the  rudest  of  men,  yes,  in  the  infant  soul  of  the 
child  just  entering  upon  the  stage  of  life,  conscience,  true  to 
its  high  origin,  true  to  the  noblest  prerogative  of  its  being, 
tells  us  all  that  these  duties  are  right,  are  good, — that  they 
harmonize  with  our  highest  welfare,  and  will  secure,  if  per- 
formed, the  approbation  of  God. 

"We  ask,  where  in  any  book  but  the  Bible  is  conscience 
so  intelligently,  so  earnestly,  and  so  effectually  appealed 
to  ?  We  ask,  where  among  all  the  books  of  human  origin 
is  couscience  so  deeply,  so  truthfully  addressed?  But  there 
is  another  argument,  of  the  highest  importance,  to  con- 
sider     What  book  but  the  Bible  imposes  such  sanctions 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE   CONSCIENCE.     397 

upon  the  conscience,  demands  so  imperious]}'  its  cultiva- 
tion and  the  bringing  it  under  the  truth  and  all  good  in- 
fluences? What  book  but  the  Bible  so  widely  addresses 
itself  to  the  conscience  under  all  circumstances  and  in  all 
relations  of  life  ?  The  conscience  is  that  which  tells  us 
what  is  right  Where  except  in  the  Bible  do  we  find 
the  appeal  so  constantly  and  so  effectually  made  to  that 
which  conscience  tells  us  is  right  f  Is  the  principle  of  right 
the  principle  of  false  religions?  Is  the  conscience  intelli- 
gently, truthfully,  and  rightfully  appealed  to  in  the  pagan 
shasters,  or  in  the  pretended  'revelations  of  successful  im- 
postors? Is  the  conscience,  the  noblest  faculty  of  man,  the 
thing  most  sought  after  in  the  Koran  of  Mohammed?  Is  it 
esteemed  chief  in  value  in  the  Sibylline  leaves  of  the  Roman 
and  Grecian  prophetess, — the  Druid  rites  of  the  ancient 
Briton, — the  songs  of  the  Scandinavian  warrior, — the  Bible 
of  the  Persian  fire-worshiper,  —  or  any  of  those  pagan 
Scriptures  that  now  hold  sway  over  millions  of  the  human 
race?  Where  except  in  the  Christian  Bible  do  we  find  the 
conscience  treated  as  God  intended  it  should  be  treated? 
Where  except  in  inspiration  do  we  find  every  sanction, 
every  command,  every  duty,  based  upon  the  immutable,  the 
eternal  principle  of  right, — right  such  as  the  conscience  feels 
and  knows, — such  as  it  recognizes  immediately  in  every  age 
and  every  land, — right  such  as  the  peasant-boy  feels  as  keenly 
as  the  monarch  upon  his  throne, — right  so  universal,  so  clearly 
defined,  so  pervading,  so  omnipresent  in  every  action  and 
thought,  that  among  all  races  and  in  every  country,  in  the 
earliest  cradle  of  civilization  as  in  the  latest  abode  of  re- 
finement and  wealth,  human  nature' gives  but  one  response, 
and  conscience  pronounces  but  one  unchanging  verdict? 

Where  except  in  the  Bible  do  we  find  conscience  treated 
as  the  minister  of  God  ?  Where  except  there  do  we  find 
the  unsullied,  the  perfect  mirror  of  every  moral  excellence 
and  of  all  right  presented  to  it  ?  In  every  other  system  of  re- 
ligion conscience  is  abased,  is  trampled  upon,  is  perverted,  is 
made  the  tool  of  designing  men,  is  seduced  into  sin,  is  de- 
nied, or  considered   unworthy  of  attention.     This    mighty 


398  ADAPTATION  OF   TEE  BIBLE 

principle  of  human  nature,  to  whicli  all  superstition  owes  its 
power,  and  by  whicli  all  false  religions  achieve  their  triumphs, 
is  degraded  from  its  lofty  seat  in  the  heart  of  man,  is  drugged 
with  the  cruel  nostrums  of  impurity  and  deceit,  is  imprisoned 
in  an  iron  cage,  is  made  a  perjured  witness  in  man's  heart. 
How  unlike  the  treatment  it  receives  from  the  Bible  !  There 
it  is  recognized  in  man  and  woman  ;  there  it  is  tenderly  cared 
for;  there  it  is  cherished  even  as  a  plant  of  celestial  beauty  ; 
there  it  is  talked  unto  even  as  a  father  converses  with  the 
child  of  his  love;  there  a  more  than  mother's  sympathy 
greets  it  even  in  its  wanderings,  and  the  wisdom  of  God 
stoops  to  beguile  it  into  the  path  of  duty.  There  is  the  con- 
science of  the  repenting  sinner  received  even  as  that  prodigal 
was  welcomed  to  a  feast  such  as  the  eldest  brother  never  saw. 
But  the  Bible  not  only  shows  itself  the  best  friend  to  the  con 
science;  it  also  reveals  itself  as  its  guide.  It  has  already 
been  seen  that  conscience  in  itself  is  not  a  sufficient  guide, — 
that  it  needs  something  more  clear,  more  imperative,  and 
more  effectual,  to  restrain  sin.  Where  except  in  the  Bible  is 
there  a  guide  for  the  conscience?  Where  is  there  in  any 
other  religion  a  directory  of  conduct  so  comprehensive,  so 
universal,  as  is  found  in  the  word  of  God  ?  What  duty  so 
small  that  it  does  not  enjoin?  what  virtue  so  great  that  it 
does  not  include?  As  a  system  of  morality  alone,  what  so 
good  as  the  Bible,  or  so  convincing  ?  Where  are  sanctions 
so  commanding,  or  rules  of  behavior  better  for  this  life?  We 
need  for  the  conscience  an  authoritative  and  an  unerring 
guide.  We  need  something  that  shall  enlighten  it  in  duty, 
awaken  it  to  right  action,  purify  it  from  corrupt  desires,  and 
make  it  sensitive  to  wrong.  Where  except  in  the  Bible  is 
the  conscience  able  to  find  such  a  guide  as  shall  deliver  from 
all  error,  preserve  from  all  corruption,  make  courageous  in 
adversity,  and  pure  in  prosperous  days  ?  Where  except  in 
the  Bible  are  we  to  look  for  a  guide  to  conscience  so  effectual 
as  that  in  all  relations  of  life  and  in  every  age  it  shall  be 
competent  for  all  wants  ?  If  there  was  no  other  argument 
for  the  divine  origin  of  the  Scriptures,  this  alone  is  reason 
enough  for  a  cordial  reception.  We  would  say  that  the  Bible 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE   CONSCIENCE.     399 

being  so  superior  to  all  other  productions  as  a  guide  to  the 
conscience,  this  should  be,  until  a  better  substitute  was  pro- 
Tided  (if  such  a  supposition  is  possible),  our  practical  guide 
through  this  world.  Try  any  other  key  but  the  Bible,  and 
in  vain  will  it  fit  itself  to  the  mysterious  lock  of  the  con- 
science ;  in  vain  can  any  other  system  be  found  that  shall 
meet  the  wants  of  conscience.  Rather,  all  false  religions  live 
by  the  perversions  of  conscience.  Like  tyrants,  they  use 
conscience  as  a  slave;  they  so  misuse,  or  blind,  or  harden 
conscience,  that  it  gives  a  forced  acquiescence  to  errors  the 
most  fearful  and  practices  the  most  corrupt.  Conscience 
is  compelled  to  walk  barefooted  over  the  iron  spikes  of 
superstition,  and  its  lacerated  body  made  to  bleed  at  every 
step. 

There  are  some  subjects  connected  with  human  interests 
beyond  the  grasp  of  the  unassisted  mind  of  man.  One  is,  how 
man,  a  sinner,  can  be  justified  with  God.  Equally  diflicult 
is  it  for  man  to  declare  the  future  condition  of  the  body 
after  death,  or  to  prove  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  Such 
subjects  reach  far  beyond  the  efforts  of  the  intellect.  If  the 
Bible  comes  to  us  throwing  the  brightest  light  upon  the 
realities  of  the  future  state, — if  it  comes  opening  up  the  deep 
mysteries  of  our  nature,  our  existence  in  this  world  and  the 
life  beyond  the  grave, — if  it  speaks  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  body,  and  confirms  the  truth  of  that  resurrection  b}^  the 
well-authenticated  resurrection  of  Christ, — then  such  gleams 
of  light  into  futurity,  such  glorious  yet  awful  distinctness  of 
delineation  of  another  world,  such  an  amazing  insight  into 
the  deepest  yet  greatest  of  truths,  can  come  from  no  human 
source.  This  we  do  know  from  history,  even  as  from  the 
clearest  deductions  of  reason.  We  do  know  that  where  the 
Bible  is  unknown,  where  man  is  left  unassisted  by  an}'  light 
from  revelation,  these  truths  are  not  known.  The  deepest, 
the  most  wide-spread  ignorance  prevails  upon  subjects  most 
intimately  connected  with  man's  welfare.  The  experiment 
has  been  tried  upon  a  great  scale,  how  much  man  left  to 
himself  can  find  out  in  respect  to  his  condition  for  a  future 
life.     That  experiment  has  uniformly  been  found  to  reveal 


400  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

the  human  mind  utterly  inadequate  to  make  known  such 
truths  or  give  any  satisfactory  evidence  of  them. 

In  respect  to  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  no  conjecture 
of  man  has  been  made.  This  truth,  when  announced  by 
Paul  to  the  Athenians,  was  ridiculed  as  the  wildest  dream 
of  the  imagination.  The  Bible  makes  known  not  only  new 
truths,  as  the  resurpection,  God  reconciled  to  man  by  the 
death  of  Christ,  an  immortality  of  soul  and  body,  and 
the  absolute  creation  of  matter  from  nothing,  but  it  throws 
the  greatest  distinctness  upon  those  truths  that  the  light  of 
nature  has  dimly  apprehended.  Just  as  when  the  naked  qjq 
sees  in  the  heavens  the  obscure  outlines  of  stars,  or  gazes 
upon  the  moon  reflecting  the  sunlight,  and  then  assists  its 
vision  by  a  telescope,  so  that  the  stars  appear  clearly  and  re- 
volving planets  are  seen,  and  mountains  aud  mighty  ravines 
upon  the  moon's  surface  are  discovered, — even  thus  the  Bible 
throws  light  upon  truths  obscurely  intimated  by  the  unas- 
sisted reason  of  man.  What  in  the  physical  world  the  tele- 
scope does  to  the  heavens,  in  the  moral  world  the  Bible  does 
to  the  mind  and  heart.  Here  alone  we  might  rest  our  argu- 
ment for  the  divine  origin  of  the  Bible.  We  might  say,  if 
the  reason  of  man  has  never  found  out  such  truths,  and  if 
the  truths  that  reason  has  made  known  are  revealed  with  a 
hundredfold  distinctness  in  revelation,  then  certairily  such  a 
production  must  come  from  a  higher  than  human  source.  But 
let  us  consider  the  Bible  as  adapted  to  the  conscience.  The 
conscience  is  a  discriminating  faculty.  However  perverted, 
it  does  not  lose  all  of  its  power  or  susceptibility  to  good  im- 
pressions. If  treated  as  a  slave,  yet  even  when  degraded  by 
abuse,  and  manacled  with  the  chains  of  superstition,  it  is  not 
wholly  deadened  to  every  idea  of  right,  or  unconscious  of  all 
moral  beauty  and  equity.  Trembling  it  may  be  in  every 
sinew  and  nerve,  suffering  it  may  be  under  the  cruel  lash  of 
bigotry  and  ferocious  ignorance,  yet  even  in  its  lowest  estate 
it  will  assert  the  high  prerogatives  of  its  existence  and  re- 
veal the  nobility  of  its  divine  original. 

When  false  philosophy  and  the  superstition  of  centuries 
have  thrown  their  black  foliao-e  over  the  foundation  of  the 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE   CONSCIENCE.     401 

greatest  of  truths,  3'et  conscience,  the  wall  of  adamant,  is  still 
seen  by  the  observer  through  the  chinks  and  openings  of  that 
fatal  drapery  that  surrounds  it.  Consider,  then,  the  adapta- 
tion of  the  Bible  to  it.  In  the  first  place,  conscience  has  a 
natural  sense  of  justice ;  it  feels  that  wrong  should  be  pun- 
ished, and  goodness  rewarded;  it  feels  that  inequality  of 
birth,  or  wealth,  or  station,  does  not  give  impunity  to  trans- 
gression, or  make  wickedness  right.  It  instinctively  declares 
that  the  man  of  rank  and  riches  should  not  murder,  or  de- 
fraud, or  in  any  way  injure  his  neighbor,  any  more  than  the 
man  of  obscurity  and  poverty ;  it  pronounces  the  law  right 
when  its  penalty  is  visited  impartially  upon  all  transgressors 
and  none  are  suifered  to  escape  punishment  when  condemned 
as  guilty.  AYhat  conscience  declares  is  right  to  be  done  to 
others,  it  declares  is  right  to  be  done  to  self.  Take  two  per- 
sons, a  man  guilty  of  an  atrocious  crime  and  a  man  innocent 
of  it.  You  cannot  reverse  the  decision  of  conscience  in  these 
two  persons.  The  feeling  and  the  approbation  of  innocence 
cannot  dwell  in  the  heart  of  the  guilty  man ;  neither  can  the 
sting  of  remorse  embitter  the  thoughts  of  him  guiltless  of  this 
crime. 

Such  being  conscience,  what  is  its  decision  in  respect  to 
the  actual  existing  state  of  the  world  ?  Here  often  crime  is 
triumphant  and  vice  successful,  while  virtue  frequently  is  de- 
famed, and  goodness  pining  in  want.  Here  is  the  strongest 
inequality  of  merit,  ignorance  and  vice  advanced  to  wealth 
and  rank,  while  knowledge  and  virtue  are  condemned  to  djes- 
titution  and  suffering.  It  is  often  true  that  crime  will  se- 
cure rewards  that  ignorance  sighs  for  in  vain.  The  natural 
feeling  of  justice,  that  conscience  possesses,  declares  that  such 
a  disturbed  state  of  things,  such  an  inequality  of  merit,  should 
be  adjusted  in  another  state.  If  here  punishment  and  reward 
cannot  be  meted  out  to  every  individual,  there  should  be 
another  state,  where  the  equilibrium  of  justice  will  be 
restored,  where  successful  crime  shall  iind  no  impunity,  and 
unrewarded  virtue  shall  completely  triumph.  The  Bible 
meets  this  discriminating  sense  of  justice  in  conscience;  it 
acknowledges  the  disorders  of  the  present  world,  and  makes 

26 


402  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

certain  another  state  where  those  disorders  shall  be  rectified. 
Thus,  as  long  ago  as  the  time  of  Job,  we  read  of  a  state  of 
things  like  that  which  exists  at  the  present  day.  Some,  says 
he,  "  remove  the  landmarks :  they  violently  take  awa}' 
flocks,  and  feed  thereof.  They  drive  away  the  ass  of  the 
fatherless.  They  take  the  widow's  ox  for  a  pledge.  They 
cause  the  naked  to  lodge  without  clothing,  that  they  have  no 
covering  in  the  cold.  They  pluck  the  fatherless  from  the 
breast,  and  take  a  pledge  of  the  poor.  Men  groan  from  out 
of  the  city,  and  the  soul  of  the  wounded  criethout:  yet  God 
layeth  not  folly  to  them."  "  Wherefore  do  the  wicked  live, 
become  old,  yea,  are  mighty  in  power?  Their  seed  is  estab- 
lished in  their  sight  with  them,  and  their  offspring  before 
their  eyes.  They  spend  their  days  in  wealth,  and  in  a  mo- 
ment go  down  to  the  grave." 

"  The  earth,"  says  he,  "  is  given  into  the  hands  of  the 
wicked,  he  covereth  the  faces  of  the  judges  thereof;  if  not, 
'"Where  and  who  is  he?'  "  As  much  as  to  say,  this  must  be 
reconciled,  whether  we  can  reconcile  it  with  the  righteous 
government  of  God  or  not.  Thus  was  Job  perplexed  before 
the  light  of  Christianity. 

The  Psalmist  found  no  relief  under  the  same  difficulty 
until  he  went  to  the  sanctuary  of  God  and  there  saw  the  end 
of  the  wicked.  Solomon,  too,  says,  "  Moreover,  I  saw  under 
the  sun  the  place  of  judgment,  that  wickedness  was  there, 
and  the  place  of  righteousness,  that  iniquity  was  there." 
Then,  as  furnishing  the  true  solution  of  the  difficulty,  he  ex- 
claims, "I  said  in  my  heart,  God  shall  judge  the  righteous 
and  the  wicked." 

Thus  revelation  refers  those  cases  which  need  adjudication 
to  God  and  a  future  state,  and  thus  complies  with  that  princi- 
ple of  equity  that  is  felt  in  every  conscience.  In  this  respect, 
how  peculiarl}' adapted  is  the  Bible  to  the  conscience!  It 
assures  the  mind  of  a  judgment  to  come,  and  of  the  restitution 
of  all  things,  when  every  difficulty  shall  be  solved,  and  every 
doubt  removed  of  equity  in  the  administration  of  the  world. 
But  the  Bible  meets  the  demands  of  conscience  in  that  it 
furnishes  a  perfect  system  of  ethics,  or  moral  duties.     Con- 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE   CONSCIENCE.     403 

science  is  a  faculty  that  discriminates  between  right  and 
wrong  The  Bible  is  distinguished  above  all  other  books 
in  that  the  conscience  finds  in  it  a  standard  of  absolute  per- 
fection in  every  moral  duty.  It  is  alike  comprehensive  and 
particular,  comprisiug  all  duties  to  God  and  man,  and  yet 
giving  to  each  duty  its  appropriate  value.  It  does  not  exalt 
a  minor  virtue  into  a  superior  virtue,  nor  degrade  the  higher 
traits  of  moral  excellence  to  a  subordinate  position.  It  does 
not  affix  an  undue  prominence  to  alms-giving  and  neglect 
the  duties  of  honest}-  and  truth.  It  does  not  extol  courage 
at  the  expense  of  humility,  nor  recommend  fast-days  and 
festivals  to  the  detriment  of  industry  and  justice.  It  enjoins 
parental  obedience  and  submission  to  civil  magistrates,  but 
not  when  that  obedience  conflicts  w^ith  the  higher  claims  of 
God  and  humanity.  It  instructs  servants  to  work  faithfully 
for  their  masters,  and  masters  to  treat  their  servants  as  chil- 
dren of  a  common  parent  and  brethren  in  the  Lord.  It  dis- 
countenances impurity  in  thought  even  as  in  overt  act,  and 
yet  affixes  the  seal  of  the  divine  approbation  upon  the  sa- 
cred ordinance  of  marriage,  and  carefully  watches  over  that 
solitary  rose  brought  from  the  garden  of  Eden.  It  delegates 
to  man  a  sovereignty  over  the  lower  orders  of  creation,  but 
refuses  to  call  him  good  who  is  unmerciful  to  his  beast.  Thus 
the  conscience  finds  in  the  Bible  a  perfect  system  of  ethics, — a 
summary  of  duties  that  comprehend  all  things  needful  to  be 
done  in  ever}'  relation  of  life.  But,  what  is  of  more  importance, 
all  these  duties  have  their  proper  place.  Like  some  beauti- 
ful temple  of  harmonious  proportion,  the  ethics  of  the  gos- 
pel never  conflict  with  each  other;  from  the  foundation  to  the 
dome,  every  stone  is  where  it  should  be,  and  every  column 
preserves  its  proper  symmetry.  Go  round  about  that  temple, 
examine  ever}'  separate  part  and  the  whole  collectively,  and 
the  artist  eye  of  an  angel  can  neither  discover  a  fault  nor  re- 
commend an  additional  beauty.  For  fallen  man  the  morality 
of  the  Bible  is  just  what  it  should  be,  and  no  better  can  be 
made  or  even  imagined.  The  ethics  of  the  Bible  are  im- 
measurably superior  to  those  of  any  other  book ;  confirming 
all  the  o-ood  the  lisfht  of  nature    discovers,  it  adds  to  it  a 


404  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

morality  peculiarly  its  own,  and  blends  both  together  in  a 
way  impossible  to  be  improved  upon.  What  better  code  of 
morality  than  the  ten  commandments  ?  What  discourse 
more  excellent  than  Christ's  sermon  on  the  Mount  ?  Historj- 
has  shown  us  how  distorted  a  morality  human  ingenuity  can 
get  up  when  it  attempts  to  improve  upon  the  Bible, — when 
it  sets  itself  up  to  be  wiser  than  God.  Thus,  for  ages,  celi- 
bacy was  recommended  as  the  pattern  of  all  goodness,  and 
marriage  contemned  even  when  monkish  presumption  dared 
not  to  call  it  wrong  ;  but  the  fruit  of  this  extra  virtue  was  wide- 
spread dissoluteness,  and  the  sacrifice  for  an  imaginary  excel- 
lence of  the  noblest  of  social  blessings,  as  well  as  the  most 
commanding  of  domestic  duties.  Thus,  for  ages,  fasts  and 
penances  were  unduly  extolled,  and  an  exaggerated  merit  put 
upon  the  laceration  of  the  body  and  the  denying  the  lawful 
claims  of  our  physical  nature ;  and  the  consequence  was  a 
Pharisaical  righteousness  and  the  forgetting  of  the  chief  duties 
of  the  gospel.  Thus,  for  ages,  festival  days  and  pilgrimages 
were  observed;  and  the  fruit  was  universal  idleness  and  pov 
erty.  Thus,  in  times  past  and  at  the  present  daj-,  socialistic 
ideas  of  civil  government,  of  servitude,  of  the  domestic  rela- 
tion, and  of  the  free  community  of  persons  and  goods,  have 
prevailed,  and  the  maxims  of  the  gospel  have  been  derided 
as  antiquated  and  oppressive ;  but  the  fruit  of  all  this  progress 
beyond  the  Bible  has  been  found  to  be  only  strife,  impurity, 
and  dissoluteness.  So  exactly  adapted  is  the  morality  of  the 
gospel  to  conscience  and  the  state  of  man  as  a  fallen  being, 
that  every  attempt  to  improve  upon  the  Bible  in  its  represen- 
tations of  human  nature,  in  any  of  its  maxims,  or  the  duties 
imposed  upon  us  as  members  of  the  family  or  the  state,  has 
invariably  proved  a  failure.  The  ordinances  of  God  have 
shown  themselves  better  and  wiser  than  the  devices  of  man. 
If,  now,  the  Bible  is  not  from  God,  why  is  it  that  the  con- 
science finds  in  it  a  truthfulness,  a  propriety,  an  adaptation, 
and  an  excellence  in  the  morality  enjoined  that  it  finds  in  no 
other  book?  IIow  happens  it  that,  if  this  is  a  human  pro- 
duction, its  ethics  are  so  superior,  that  the  greatest  skeptics 
speak  of  it  in  its  moral  duties  as  the  best,  the  purest,  the 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE    CONSCIENCE.     405 

noblest  of  books  ?  How  happeus  it  that  a  volume  that 
consists  of  sixtj'-six  separate  books,  of  Avhich  tlie  book  of 
Psalms  contains  no  less  tlian  one  bnndrecl  and  fifty  dis- 
tinct compositions, — a  volume  tbat  contains  many  hundred 
separate  treatises,  having  no  other  connection  with  each 
other  than  that  they  treat  of  the  same  general  matters  or 
were  composed  by  the  same  persons, — a  volume  of  differ- 
ent compositions,  that  occupied  a  period  of  fifteen  or  six- 
teen centuries  in  their  production,  and  which  professes  to 
cover,  historically  and  prophetically,  the  whole  period  of 
man's  existence  upon  this  earth, — a  volume  embracing  every 
variety  of  style, — whose  principal  authors  were  about  thirty, 
not  including  those  under  the  general  division,  from  every 
rank  in  life,  kings,  shepherds,  magistrates,  soldiers,  scholars, 
judges,  priests,  generals,  fishermen,  farmers,  tax-gatherers, — 
a  volume  with  ethics  so  pure,  with  no  collision  of  facts,  no 
disagreement  of  truths,  alike  the  most  diversified  and  yet  the 
most  unique, — a  volume  embracing  the  whole  circle  of  duties 
to  God  and  man,  adjusted  for  every  age,  appropriate  for  all 
countries,  alike  good  for  the  peasant-boj^  and  the  king,  the 
Tefined  and  the  rustic,  the  rich  and  the  poor, — a  guide  alike 
excellent  for  every  conscience,  suitable  for  all  times  and  oc- 
casions,— how  happens  it  that  such  a  volume  should  spring 
from  human  contrivance  and  be  alone  the  offspring  of  human 
learning?  How  happens  so  great  an  agreement  with  so 
wonderful  a  diversity  of  subjects  ?  No  other  such  book  is 
there  in  all  the  libraries  of  the  world.  How  wonderful  that 
moral  duties  should  be  so  delineated  and  enforced  as  to  be 
recognized  appropriate  and  excellent  by  the  conscience  in  all 
ages  and  countries !  If  ethics  so  pure,  so  universal,  so  com- 
manding, were  only  of  human  origin,  would  it  not  be  a  mira- 
cle of  strangeness  more  wonderful  than  all  other  miracles 
too'ether?  If  the  writers  of  these  books  were  honest  men, 
they  would  not  palm  off  their  compositions  as  divine,  if 
they  were  human ;  and  if  these  men  were  dishonest,  the}^ 
could  not.  Take  which  supposition  we  please,  and  we  arrive 
at  the  same  conclusion:  honesty  would  not,  and  dishonesty  could 
not,  compose  the  Scriptures. 


406  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

There  is  an  incidental  proof  of  the  divine  origin  of  the 
Bible  deserving  of  high  consideration.  This  proof  consists 
in  the  fact  that,  while  so  perfectly  adapted  to  the  conscience 
as  a  discriminating  power,  it  never  attempts  to  secure  an  in- 
fluence over  the  conscience  by  any  of  those  methods  so 
common  in  false  religions.  Every  system  of  human  inven- 
tion is  local  in  its  nature,  and  consults  present  advantage 
rather  than  future  success.  Thus  we  find  all  the  common 
ideas  of  science  and  art  prevailing  at  the  time  the  pretended 
revelation  is  made,  eagerly  made  use  of  as  available  to  secure 
a  power  over  the  conscience.  No  matter  Avhether  those  pop- 
ular ideas  are  true  or  false,  no  matter  whether  they  corre- 
spond to  actual  facts  in  science  or  not,  they  are  embodied  in 
all  the  antichristian  Bibles.  Thus  it  is  only  necessary  to  give 
the  actual  truths  of  natural  science  and  philosophy  to  prove 
false  the  heathen  shasters,  and  every  production  of  man  pre- 
suming to  claim  a  divine  origin.  A  correct  demonstration 
in  astronomy  or  chemistry  will  undermine  the  whole  fabric 
of  any  book  professing  to  be  a  revelation  from  God,  other 
than  the  Bible. 

What  is  the  course  pursued  in  the  Scriptures  ?  Had  the 
actual  facts  of  science  been  made  known,  the  ages  in  which 
the  different  treatises  of  the  Bible  were  written  would  not 
have  been  prepared  to  receive  them ;  and  had  the  folse  ideas 
been  communicated,  after-ages  of  infidels  would  have  gloried 
over  the  fallibility  of  the  Bible,  the  conscience  would  have 
been  imposed  upon  by  untruths,  and  the  proud  philosophers 
of  the  present  day  would  have  pointed  with  a  skeptical  sneer 
to  the  Bible  as  a  musty  collection  of  antiquated  notions, 
unfit  to  be  received  by  the  more  advanced  children  of  civil- 
ization and  knowledge. 

But  what  is  the  fact?  "With  a  studied  reserve  and  a 
guarded  caution  impossible  for  uninspired  men  to  exercise, 
all  the  compositions  of  the  Bible  were  made.  The  unavoid- 
able prejudices  and  feelings  of  ages  less  enlightened  found 
nothing  in  the  Bible  to  contradict  directlj'  the  prevailing 
opinions  in  astronomy,  chemistry,  and  geolog}",  and  at  the 
same  time  nothing  to  substantiate  or  confirm  those  opinions. 


TO  HUMAN  NATURE  AND    THE   CONSCIENCE.     407 

The  lauguage  of  popular  life,  even  as  at  present,  was  made 
use  of,  but  in  no  such  sense  as  to  authorize  the  belief  of  a 
single  false  statement  in  science,  history,  or  physical  geogra- 
phy. Here  consists  the  immeasurable  superiority  of  the 
Scriptures  to  everj'  human  production.  Take  any  history, 
or  important  composition  of  poetry  or  philosophy  of  any 
one  age,  and  the  prevailing  errors  of  the  day  are  found  inter- 
woven into  it.  N"ot  so,  however,  in  the  Bible;  adapted 
to  the  age  in  which  each  separate  treatise  was  written,  ex- 
tending over  a  period  of  sixteen  centuries,  it  has  in  it  not 
one  false  statement  in  science, — it  seeks  to  impose  upon  the 
conscience  not  a  single  influence  that  owes  its  charm  to  error. 
It  is  as  true  to  the  intellectual  as  to  the  moral  nature ;  and 
every  research  of  the  present  day,  in  every  department  of 
knowledge,  is  forced  to  acknowledge  the  consummate  wisdom 
that  dictated  the  writings  of  the  Bible ;  a  wisdom  infinite  in 
foresight,  and  not  less  infinite  in  beauty  of  adaptation  ;  a  wis- 
dom so  great  that  the  revelation  of  the  remotest  age  of  anti- 
quity can  be  adjusted  to  the  present  day,  and  from  which  not 
a  single  chapter  can  be  spared  without  a  detriment  to  the 
whole. 

But  the  Bible  is  not  only  adapted  to  the  conscience  in  that, 
unlike  false  religions,  it  seeks  to  secure  no  influence  over  it 
by  error,  but  especially  in  that  it  afibrds  to  the  conscience 
the  only  firm  and  the  only  good  foundation  to  rest  upon. 
There  is  that  in  man's  nature  that  points  to  something  higher 
than  man,  higher  than  law  itself,  higher  than  all  created 
power,  as  necessary  to  save  from  sin.  There  is  that  in  con- 
science that  cannot  be  satisfied  with  the  imposing  glare  of 
religious  deceit,  or  the  most  attractive  mummeries  of  super- 
stition. There  is  a  feeling  in  conscience  that  can  find  no 
resting-place  except  it  be  in  the  cross  of  Christ.  As  the 
dove  sent  out  of  the  ark  by  Noah  flew  restless  over  the  waters 
of  a  drowning  world,  and  found  no  green  spot  to  repose  her 
wearied  body  amid  the  wide-spread  desolations  of  the  flood, 
80  conscience  can  find  no  resting-place  in  false  religions,  and 
wanders  unsatisfied  among  the  ruins  of  a  fallen  nature.  It 
is  in  the  Bible  alone  that  the  conscience  finds  its  deepest 


408  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE,   ETC. 

wants  met.  Here  is  found  that  perfect  key  that  opens  the 
door  of  human  nature.  What  more  convincing  argument 
to  reveal  its  origin  from  God  ? 

Why  for  so  many  ages,  if  the  Bible  is  not  divine,  have  not 
human  wisdom  and  learning  found  out  something  adapted 
to  the  conscience  ?  How  happened  it,  if  the  Bible  is  not 
from  God,  that  there  sprang  up  amid  the  mountains  of  Judea, 
amid  a  nation  comparatively  obscure  and  in  every  respect 
inferior  to  the  renowned  nations  of  antiquity  in  learning, 
in  refinement,  in  science,  in  philosophy,  and  art,  a  book 
adapted  to  the  conscience  in  all  ages  and  in  every  land ;  a 
book  so  superior  that  it  has  triumphed  over  every  device  of 
superstition  and  every  argument  of  infidelity;  so  superior 
that  conscience  finds  alone  in  it  a  perfect  standard  of  conduct 
and  yet  the  only  panacea  for  sin ;  so  superior  that  it  has 
found  its  way  to  millions  of  firesides  and  is  bowed  to  as  di- 
vine alike  in  the  palace  and  the  hovel ;  so  superior  that  it 
has  supplanted  the  proudest  systems  of  superstition,  and 
formed  the  foundation  of  the  highest  civilization  of  modern 
times ;  so  superior  that  it  has  commanded  the  respect  and 
obedience  of  the  wisest  and  best  of  every  age,  and  for  whose 
preservation  the  blood  of  countless  martyrs  has  flowed,  and 
would  yet  flow,  if  necessary,  to  the  last  hour  of  time  ? 


CHAPTER  XII. 

ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE  TO  THE  AFFECTIONS  AND  THE  WILL. 

The  popular  language  of  the  word  of  God  in  respect  to 
the  affections  will  be  found,  upon  a  careful  examination,  to 
embody  more  truth  in  the  relation  which  the  affections  sus- 
tain to  the  intellect  and  the  will,  than  can  be  found  in  any 
metaphysical  treatise.  The  difficulty  often  in  metaphysical 
reasoning  is  that  the  will  is  divorced  from  the  affections  and 
considered  too  exclusively  the  moving  agent  of  human  con- 
duct ;  but,  in  fact,  the  affections  have  as  much  to  do  with  our 
actions  as  the  will  has.  The  will  is  the  executive  agent,  and 
its  decisions  control  the  conduct:  without  volition  we  will 
never  act.  But  what  is  it,  in  the  main,  that  leads  to  volition  ? 
what  is  it  that  makes  the  will  decide  upon  any  course  of  life  ? 
Evidently,  the  affections :  lying  back  of  the  will,  they  yet 
most  powerfully  influence  it.  Whenever  the  will  attempts 
to  act  contrary  to  the  affections,  the  action  is  constrained,  re- 
luctant, and  cheerless.  The  outward  obedience  may  be  ren- 
dered, but  inwardly  there  is  sometliing  that  hangs  like  a 
weight  upon  the  will;  that  something  acts  constantly  as  a 
restraining  power,  ever  increasing  in  energy,  until,  like  a  roll- 
ing ball  under  the  influence  of  ceaseless  friction,  the  will  at 
length  stops. 

Thus  difficult  is  it  in  human  conduct  to  act  against  the 
affections.  The  intellect,  the  conscience,  and  the  will  may 
all  be  upon  one  side,  and  yet  if  the  affections  are  upon  the 
other  side  they  will  turn  the  balance.  IIow  often  is  this 
seen  in  human  life !  How  often  is  it  true  that  the  lover  of 
strong  drink,  or  of  any  other  vice,  has  turned  back  again, 
against  his  better  judgment,  against  his  conscience,  and  made 
even  the  opposing  will  at  last  to  yield  !  Thus,  in  the  Bible  we 
read,  "  With  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteousness," 
rather  than  with  the  will.     The  heart  is  the  seat  of  the  aftec- 

(409) 


410  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE 

tions,  and  it  is  always  addressed  in  the  Bible  in  preference  to 
tlie  will:  that  right,  and  the  will  is  right, — that  wrong,  and 
the  will  must  be  wrong.  The  overlooking  of  this  fact  has 
often  occasioned  great  error  in  presenting  the  subject  of  reli- 
gion to  the  mind.  It  is  sometimes  said  that  conversion  con- 
sists in  volition;  but  conversion  consists  in  a  change  of  heart 
rather  than  in  right  willing. 

No  difficulty  about  the  will,  if  the  heart  is  right;  but  unless 
that  is  so,  the  will  is  more  unmanageable  than  any  mind  can 
conceive  of.  Its  volitions  are  cheerless,  reluctant,  inconstant, 
and  feeble.  There  is  a  moral  gravitation  in  the  wrong  di- 
rection, a  principle  of  vicious  attraction  that  invariably  over- 
comes at  last.  Overt  acts  may  indeed  be  performed,  but  a 
loveless  obedience  is  soon  converted  into  open  rebellion. 
With  the  affections  against  the  will,  there  is  an  under-current 
of  unremitting  energy;  nothing  can  effectually  stem  that 
current.  The  will  may  try  to  do  it,  but  every  moment  it 
grows  weaker.  Before  the  will  can  grow  daily  in  strength, 
until  it  becomes  fixed  into  habit,  and  habit  becomes  con- 
verted into  nature,  there  must  be  the  turning  of  the  affec- 
tions. If  the  will  has  the  affections  upon  its  side,  it  will 
triumph  over  all  obstacles;  if  against  it,  the  smallest  impedi- 
ments will  be  enough  to  prevent  success.  When  the  serpent 
in  the  garden  tempted  Eve,  the  appeal  first  was  made  to  the 
understanding.  The  devil,  skilled  in  the  science  of  war, 
stormed  first  the  castle  that  guarded  the  entrance  to  the 
affections.  Says  the  tempter,  Yea,  hath  God  said,  Ye  shall 
not  eat  of  every  tree  of  the  garden  ?  As  much  as  to  say, 
Is  it  possible  that  God,  a  good  being,  could  have  prohibited 
a  single  tree  in  Eden  ?  Here  doubt  of  the  goodness  and  ve- 
racity of  God  was  suggested.  Then  comes  the  bold  avowal, 
"  Ye  shall  not  surelj"  die."  With  the  principle  of  confidence 
in  God  destroyed,  the  next  step  to  be  taken  is  the  securing 
of  the  understanding.  The  tempter  now  appeals  directly  to 
the  strongest  principle  of  human  nature, — the  love  of  knowl- 
edge, or  curiosity,  and  the  love  of  ambition,  or  aggran- 
dizement. "  For  God  doth  know  that  in  the  day  ye  eat 
thereof,  then  your  eyes  shall  be  opened,  and  ye  shall  be  as 
gods,  knowing  good  and  evil." 


TO    THE  AFFECTIONS  AND    THE    WILL.  411 

The  way  is  now  folly  open  for  the  conquest  of  the  aftec- 
tions;  these  must  lirst  be  gained  over  to  the  side  of  sin  before 
there  is  a  direct  action  of  the  will.  "And  when  the  woman 
saw  that  the  tree  was  good  for  food,  and  that  it  was  pleasant 
to  the  eyes,  and  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one  wise,  she 
took  of  the  fruit  thereof,  and  did  eat,  and  gave  also  unto  her 
husband  with  her,  and  he  did  eat." 

Thus  we  see  that  the  affections  were  appealed  to  in  a 
threefold  way.  The  tree  was  good  for  food ;  that  carried'the 
appetites:  it  was  pleasant  to  the  eyes;  that  gained  over  the 
love  of  the  beautiful :  it  was  a  tree  to  be  desired  to  make  one 
wise ;  that  secured  the  love  of  knowledge.  Here  is  a  strik- 
ing illustration  of  the  manner  in  which  the  affections  are 
appealed  to.  The  affections  have  to  do  with  three  parts  of 
our  nature, — the  sensuous,  the  sesthetic,  and  the  intellectual. 
One  is  the  seat  of  the  appetites,  the  other  of  the  taste,  and 
the  last  of  the  reason.  No  sooner  had  these  susceptibilities 
of  our  nature  been  gained,  than  we  read  of  the  overt  act 
which  consummated  the  decision  of  the  will,  in  the  words, 
"  She  took  of  the  fruit  thereof,  and  did  eat." 

Let  us,  then,  consider  in  what  respect  the  Bible  is  adapted 
to  the  affections.  The  affections  are  the  emotional  part  of 
our  nature,  intimately  associated  with  the  body,  the  taste, 
ai>d  the  mind, — sensuous,  ?esthetic,  and  intellectual.  Let 
us  consider  first  the  sensuous  part  of  our  nature.  The 
body,  since  the  fall,  with  the  animal  wants  has  stepped  be- 
yond its  legitimate  sphere  and  encroached  upon  the  nobler 
part  of  man,  the  conscience  and  the  mind.  Appetite  has 
made  man,  created  in  the  image  of  God,  the  slave  of  unlaw^- 
ful  desires.  What  is  the  result?  The  appetites  getting 
the  ascendency  over  the  conscience  and  the  reason,  the 
affections  are  carried  away  by  the  sensuous  part.  In  the 
[esthetic  and  intellectual  nature  of  man,  also,  all  the  suscepti- 
bilities being  upon  the  side  of  sin,  the  will  and  the  con- 
science are  weakened  and  depraved.  Before  the  fall  the 
affections  were  exactly  balanced,  and  ever  acted  in  harmony; 
but  since  the  fall  the  sensuous  part  of  the  affections  has  pre- 
ponderated over  the  nobler  part,  and  consequently  the  result 


412  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

has  beeu  that  sin,  exercising  a  control  over  the  affections  in 
every  part,  has,  through  the  heart,  made  tributary  to  it  the 
wilL  Consider,  then,  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the 
aflections.  In  the  first  place,  the  Bible  regulates  the  affec- 
tions. The  sensuous  love  that  exists  at  the  expense  of  the 
aesthetic  and  intellectual  is  made  subordinate  to  the  nobler 
principles  of  our  nature.  The  gratification  of  the  appetite 
is  considered  inferior  to  the  love  of  that  which  is  beautiful, 
or  noble,  or  refined,  or  intellectual.  Those  mental  and  moral 
traits  that  ally  man  to  an  angel  are  deemed  infinitely  superior 
to  those  animal  propensities  that  are  common  to  the  brutes. 
But  the  Bible  especially  cultivates  that  part  of  the  affections 
which  is  most  intimately  connected  with  the  conscience. 
Thus,  when  the  mind  perceives  some  good  action,  some  noble 
or  worthy  deed  in  another,  there  is  a  feeling  of  moral  appro- 
bation. The  affections  are  so  constituted  as  to  feel  resent- 
ment at  wrong  conduct,  while  they  can  be  awakened  to  a 
high  degree  of  pleasure  when  there  is  the  consideration  of 
some  illustrious  act  that  confers  lasting  benefit  upon  man- 
kind. They  can  also  be  aroused  to  the  deepest  feeling  of 
contempt  or  hatred  of  some  atrocious  deed  of  treachery  or 
crime.  Where  except  in  the  Bible  is  there  such  an  appeal 
made  to  the  moral  feelings  ?  Where  are  the  affections  in 
any  other  book  so  often,  so  earnestly,  and  so  effectually  ad- 
dressed in  all  that  exalts  or  ennobles  man?  Here  is  man, 
with  a  sensuous  nature  that  from  the  fall  constantly  seeks, 
with  its  passions  and  appetites,  to  encroach  upon  the  nobler 
class  of  affections.  How  is  that  ever-increasing  tendency  to 
the  undue  gratification  of  sense  to  be  obviated  ?  Evidently, 
by  the  most  skillfully  adjusted  system  of  motives  to  those 
affections  which  comprehend  the  love  of  the  beautiful,  the 
wise,  and  the  good  ;  which  are  associated  peculiarly  with  the 
intellect  and  the  moral  sense.  The  affections  find  the  Bible 
in  every  respect  adapted  to  every  existing  want  of  the  social 
and  family  relation.  ISTo  religion  like  Christianity  so  guards 
and  honors  the  relation  of  father  and  mother,  or  brother  and 
sister.  Rather,  other  religions  leave  the  most  sacred  ties  of 
nature  exposed   to  the  rude  inroads  of  enemies ;  other  re- 


TO    TEE  AFFECTIOyi^  AND    THE    WILL.  413 

ligions  pull  down  those  barriers  that  God  in  nature  has 
erected  to  preserve  the  purity  of  the  domestic  institution  ; 
other  religions  foster  those  appetites  that  constantly  need  the 
most  vigilant  caution  to  restrain.  The  pagan  shasters  and 
the  Koran  of  Mohammed  have  no  effectual  antidote  to  the 
immoderate  indulgence  of  the  senses.  Rather,  in  their  delin- 
eations of  heathen  gods  or  the  paradise  of  the  Mohammedan, 
little  or  no  restraint  is  exercised  over  the  appetites.  This 
was  a  part  of  human  nature  too  difficult  to  manage.  Conse- 
quently, we  find  license  is  given  to  those  passions  that,  unlaw- 
fully indulged  in,  do  more  to  injure  the  moral  and  intellectual 
part  of  man  than  all  other  sins  together.  Here  the  profound 
wisdom  of  Christianity  is  displayed  to  most  advantage.  It 
seeks  not  to  destroy  the  passions,  but  to  regulate  them.  It 
keeps  the  river  of  sense  within  its  natural  bounds,  and 
throws  up  an  embankment  when  its  swelling  waters  would 
deluge  the  land.  By  appealing  more  to  the  aesthetic  and 
intellectual  part  of  the  affections,  it  nicely  preserves  the 
equipoise  that  ever  should  exist  between  the  varied  classes 
of  feelings  that  agitate  the  soul.  Thus  we  find  that  the 
affections  have  in  the  Bible  their  highest  security  and  their 
noblest  development.  Whatever  is  pure,  or  generous,  or 
noble,  or  good,  whatever  tends  to  repress  what  is  low,  or 
deo'radino'  to  a  human  being-,  finds  in  revelation  a  most 
effectual  aid. 

The  Bible  is  especially  adapted  to  the  afifections  in  the  reli- 
gious sensibilities.  Man  has  moral  feelings  as  well  as  appe- 
tites :  one  allies  him  with  the  angels,  the  other  with  the  brutes. 
Thus,  in  the  heart  of  man  there  are  two  classes  of  feelings, 
each  pulling  in  an  opposite  direction.  That  which  pertains 
to  the  moral  nature  speaks  of  God,  of  the  future  world,  of 
right  and  wrong,  and  of  human  accountability.  That  which 
pertains  to  the  sense  urges  on  to  sensuous  gratification  in  its 
varied  forms.  It  is  the  preponderance  of  this  part  of  the 
afifections  in  the  heart  of  man  that  leads  him  so  constantly 
into  sin ;  with  mighty  attraction  it  draws  all  the  nobler  feelings 
after  it,  until  by  successive  stages  of  debasement  there  seems 
tobe  obliterated,  except  in  the  intellect,  everything  that  distin- 


414  ADAPTATION  OF  THE   BIBLE 

guishes  a  man  from  a  brute.  Here,  then,  consists  the  highest 
adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the  affections ;  for  that  only  is 
adapted  to  them  which  ennobles  and  purifies  them. 

The  religious  sensibilities,  the  moral  feelings,  are  most 
effectually  and  constantly  appealed  to,  cherished,  and 
strengthened.  Where  nature  fails,  a  supernatural  grace  is 
given.  Thus,  the  whole  tendency  and  aim  of  the  Bible  is  to 
reverse  the  fatal  attraction  in  man's  heart  to  that  which  per- 
tains alone  to  the  body.  Compare  by  this  test  the  religion 
of  Christ  with  the  religions  that  disclaim  Christianity.  In  the 
one  case  we  see  a  uniform,  persevering  effort  to  raise  man 
above  the  unlawful  sway  of  the  senses;  in  the  other,  as  marked 
an  influence  to  bring  him  into  bondage  to  his  lower  nature. 
The  one  raises  man  to  the  level  of  the  angel,  the  other  de- 
grades him  to  that  of  the  brute.  No  matter  if  the  intellect- 
ual and  iiesthetic  part  of  the  affections  is  addressed  in  other 
religions  than  the  Bible, — no  matter  if  the  heathen  have 
their  code  of  morals  that  comprise  some  of  the  duties  of  life, 
— yet  we  judge  of  false  religions  by  their  prevailing  spirit  and 
tendency,  not  by  their  occasional  virtues.  By  such  a  test,  what 
contrast  greater  than  that  which  exists  between  the  religion 
of  Christ  and  every  system  that  disavows  Christianity  ? 

But  the  Bible  is  adapted  to  the  affections  in  the  intimate 
sympathy  manifested  toward  those  who  suffer  when  the  ties 
of  social  life  and  of  family  are  sundered.  What  more  sooth- 
ing than  the  w^ords  of  consolation  addressed  to  him  who  has 
lost  a  father,  or  mother,  or  brother,  or  sister  ?  Where  do 
poverty  and  want  find  such  supports  when  the  world  is  dark 
and  life's  pilgrimage  is  strewed  with  thorns  ?  A  Bible  for 
the  prosperous  and  the  happy, — a  Bible  for  sunny  days  and 
bright  skies, — a  Bible  for  the  noble,  the  rich,  or  the  gifted, — 
a  Bible  for  such  classes  only, — such  a  Bible  would  be  no 
Bible  for  the  great  mass  of  mankind.  It  is  the  appropriate- 
ness of  Christ's  religion  for  dark  days  and  storms,  for  adverse 
winds  and  the  cold  winter  of  life,  that  makes  it  most  useful 
and  that  most  clearly  reveals  its  divine  origin.  It  is  when 
affliction,  like  night,  comes  down  upon  the  heart,  and  suffer- 
ing and  pain  are  the  daily  lot,  when  friends  are  taken  away 


TO    THE  AFFECTIONS  AND    THE    WILL.  415 

and  the  dearest  ties  of  earth  are  sundered, — it  is  in  such  a 
fire  that  we  test  the  purity  of  the  gold.  By  such  an  ordeal, 
how  immeasurably  superior  the  Bible  is  shown,  to  all  other 
books  !  To  the  soul  of  man  it  speaks  of  Christ  the  Saviour, 
of  the  resurrection,  and  the  life  of  heaven,  and  the  guardian 
angels, — of  God  the  infinite  Father,  and  the  Holy  Spirit 
the  regenerator.  Well  might  the  martyrs  rejoice  at  the 
loss  of  all  earthly  things,  well  might  they  triumph  upon  the 
rack  and  at  the  stake,  Avhen  themes  so  grand,  so  pure,  so 
noble,  and  so  soothing  absorbed  the  afiections.  For  every 
deprivation  of  sense  it  repays  by  treasures  whose  value  is 
but  faintly  shadowed  forth  in  the  words,  "  a  far  more  ex- 
ceeding and  eternal  weight  of  glory." 

Consider  not  only  the  appropriateness  of  the  Bible  to 
the  afiJections,  but  the  wise  indulgence  it  gives  to  them  in 
seasons  of  afiliction.  Stoicism,  with  its  rough  severity,  en- 
genders an  unnatural  pride,  while  it  sacrifices  the  natural 
feelings.  If  it  teaches  us  not  to  weep,  it  attains  its  end  only 
by  the  dismemberment  of  our  nature.  By  repressing  the 
outbursts  of  natural  affection,  it  converts  humanity  into  a 
stone.  Far  more  wisely  adapted  is  Christianity  to  our  na- 
ture. The  great  author  of  Christianity  wept  at  the  grave  of 
Lazarus,  and  in  the  sublime  words,  "Jesus  wept,"  we  have 
humanity  revealed  in  its  noblest,  its  most  exalted  form. 
Stoicism  would  destroy  such  a  humanity;  but  in  its  ruin 
would  be  buried  the  best  part  of  man.  Directly  the  reverse 
of  the  influence  of  Stoicism  is  that  of  Epicureanism.  The 
afltections  by  this  are  brutified,  drowned  in  a  sea  of  sensuality. 
They  are  stupefied  and  infinitely  debased.  The  themes  that 
the  Bible  presents  to  the  affections  are  pure,  noble,  and  most 
excellent.  By  them,  while  the  affections  are  softened,  the}- 
are  also  strengthened,  made  to  entwine  around  pillars  of  im- 
mortal beauty  and  loveliness.  But  Epicureanism  tramples 
the  affections  into  the  mire  and  shuts  out  from  the  mind 
every  beam  of  glory.  Its  religion  is.  Eat,  drink,  and  be  merry. 
Its  only  life  is  this  world,  and  all  that  lies  beyond  is  oblivion 
and  death.  Thus  it  gives  to  the  sensual  gratification  a  value 
most  disproportionate,  and,  having  no  heaven  in  the  future,  it 


416  •  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

would  make  out  the  short  pleasures  of  sense  the  ouly  para- 
dise for  man.  To  man  in  darkness  of  mind,  in  those  hours 
when  affliction  throws  gloom  and  wretchedness  over  the 
soul,  Epicureanism  has  the  same  unvarying  lesson,  the  same 
dull  and  groveling  humanity,  "Eat,  drink,  and  be  merry," 
and  the  lacerated  feelings  of  the  soul  are  soothed  with  the 
only  words,  "Live  while  you  live,  the  Epicure  would  say, 
and  seize  the  pleasures  of  the  present  da}-."  How  differently 
are  the  affections  treated  in  the  Bible  !  Before  the  riches  of 
heaven,  earth's  riches  appear  infinitely  little;  before  the 
pleasures  of  immortality,  all  the  pleasures  of  the  world 
dwindle  into  insignificance. 

Let  us,  then,  consider  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the 
will.  The  will  is  intimately  associated  with  the  affections. 
What,  then,  is  true  of  the  affections  is  equally  so  of  the  will. 
What  is  adapted  in  the  Bible  to  the  one  must  be  so  to  the 
other.  There  are  two  aspects  in  which  the  will  finds  the 
Bible  adapted  to  it:  first,  as  a  regulating  power;  secondly, 
as  a  strengthening  and  energizing  power.  When  the  appe- 
tites and  affections  are  enslaved  by  sin,  the  result  is  that  the 
will  is  to  the  last  degree  irregular  and  inconstant  in  the  per- 
formance of  duty;  it  is  so  unstable  in  doing  right  that 
every  wind  can  blow  it  round  the  compass,  and  every  breath 
of  air  make  it  change  from  a  right  direction.  The  smallest 
temptations  will  upset  the  best  resolutions.  What  matters 
it  that  the  will  is  right  this  moment,  if  the  next  moment  it  is  a 
slave  to  every  gust  of  passion  or  appetite  ? 

With  the  affections  and  appetites  enchained  by  sin,  the  will 
is  mighty  for  vice  and  persevering  in  wrong.  Like  some 
sick  man  in  a  delirium,  it  possesses  great  strengths  and 
weaknesses,  now  working  miracles  of  energy,  again  more 
feeble  than  an  infant.  Here  it  is  that  Christianity  comes  in 
as  a  regulator  to  movements  so  inconstant  and  so  vicious. 
For  every  emergency  of  our  nature  it  has  its  separate  class 
of  motives  ;  those  motives  act  in  a  twofold  way :  first  as  a  re- 
straining power,  again  as  an  invigorating  power.  Fear  is 
the  mighty  instrument  by  which  it  restrains  the  will  from  sin, 
hope  the  elixir  of  life  by  which  it.  strengthens  it  to  good. 


TO    THE  AFFECTIONS  AND    THE   WILL.  417 

IsTo  sanctions  so  terrible  to  the  transgressor  as  those  of 
revelation,  no  inducements  so  persuasive  to  right  action. 
To  the  sinner,  rushing  impetuously  into  iniquity,  it  speaks 
of  the  worm  that  never  dies,  and  of  the  lire  that  is  never 
quenched;  it  speaks  of  a  prison  whose  gate  mercy  never 
enters,  and  of  a  punishment  where  justice  never  tires. 

This  is  not  the  place  for  us  to  discuss  the  question  of  the 
truth  of  such  representations.  Our  only  object  now  is  to 
consider  the  Bible  as  adapted  to  the  will;  and  here,  resting 
the  whole  question  of  future  punishment  upon  the  fitness  of 
things,  we  say,  that  to  accomplish  the  end  effectually  of  se- 
curing men  from  sin,  the  element  of  fear  in  a  divine  revela- 
tion is  absolutely  necessary.  It  is  so  in  human  governments  ; 
why  not  so  in  the  divine  government?  All  law  rests  upon 
the  element  of  fear;  all  penalties  are  but  living  embodiments 
of  fear  realized.  Constituted  as  men  are,  to  make  the  Bible 
adapted  to  restrain  from  sin,  it  must  have  the  element  of 
fear ;  and  thus  we  find  it.  No  book  has  in  it  such  motives  of 
fear  to  deter  the  will  from  sin. 

Consider  also  the  Bible  as  adapted  to  the  will,  in  having 
the  element  of  hope.  Despair  is  the  death  of  all  action,  the 
eepulcher  of  all  happiness.  Did  the  Bible  present  but  one 
kind  of  motives,  and  that  resting  alone  upon  the  element  of 
fear,  no  language  could  describe  the  gloom  that  would  rest 
upon  all  human  affairs,  no  thought  conceive  of  the  depres- 
sion that  would  weigh  down  the  spirits  of  men.  Observe 
how  revelation  adjusts  itself  to  that  which  most  effectually 
can  move  the  will.  "What  are  the  inducements  a  skillful 
general  presents  to  his  soldiers  when  the  battle  waxes  hot 
and  gleaming  swords  and  the  storm-fire  of  death  rage 
around  ?  Is  the  element  of  fear,  of  disgrace,  the  certainty 
of  a  worse  end  than  that  secured  by  the  enem}^  alone  ap- 
pealed to?  Far  from  it.  A  twofold  combination  of  mo- 
tive is  presented, — fear  and  hope.  Other  principles  of  human 
nature  are  addressed  than  those  affected  by  fear.  Amid  the 
smoke  and  the  carnage  of  war,  the  soldier's  eye  is  lighted 
up  with  the  hope  of  victory,  the  glory  of  conquest,  and  the 
laurel  of  fame.     Honor  holds  over  his  head  her  glittering 

27 


418  ADAPTATION  OF   THE  BIBLE,   ETC. 

crown,  and  the  music  notes  of  a  nation's  gratitude  steal  upon 
his  ear.  Just  so  is  it  in  the  word  of  God.  The  Christian 
soldier  is  nerved  to  his  more  diiBcult  and  far  longer  warfare 
by  a  combination  of  motive  to  the  will,  surpassing  all  lan- 
guage to  describe.  Would  the  tired  soldier  retreat  and  go 
back  to  sin  ?  Fear  stands  at  the  gate  of  such  a  thought,  and 
urges  him  to  stand  his  ground,  by  representations  of  disgrace 
and  ruin  such  as  make  the  blood  run  cold  to  think  upon. 
Would  he  go  forward  ?  Hope  stands  with  angel  smile,  and 
cheers  him  with  music  richer  by  far  than  earth's  sweetest 
minstrelsy.  Thus,  while  on  the  one  side  the  will  is  restrained, 
on  the  other  it  is  encouraged  and  strengthened.  Deficient 
in  vital  power,  by  seeking  divine  help  a  celestial  energy  is 
bestowed ;  then  does  it  recover  from  its  natural  fickleness  in 
doing  right,  and  perseveres  in  a  true  direction. 

Thus,  the  will  of  man,  by  nature  weak,  inconstant,  change- 
able, and  uncertain,  becomes,  through  the  word  of  God  im- 
parting to  it  a  vital  power,  strong,  constant,  unwavering,  and 
fixed,  and  triumphs  at  last,  with  heaven  for  its  home,  Christ 
for  its  portion,  and  immortal  blessedness  for  its  reward.  We 
could  not,  if  we  would,  improve  upon  the  philosophy  of  the 
Bible. 


CHAPTER   XIII. 

ADAPTATION    OP    THE    BIBLE    TO    THE    INTELLECT    AND    THE 
IxMAGINATION. 

Man  is  a  complex  being ;  he  has  body,  soul,  and  spirit. 
The  body  is  material,  the  soul  mental,  and  the  spirit  directly 
of  divine  origin.  Thus,  we  read  of  the  body  at  death  return- 
ing to  the  dust,  but  of  the  spirit  as  returning  to  God  who 
gave  it.  The  soul  and  spirit  of  man  possess  not  only  a  con- 
science, or  a  moral  nature,  but  most  intimately  associated 
with  that  nature  are  the  intellect,  the  imagination,  the  affec- 
tions, and  the  will.  If  it  is  of  the  highest  importance  that 
the  Bible  should  be  adapted  to  the  conscience,  which  pecu- 
liarly distinguishes  man  as  a  moral  agent,  it  is  no  less 
important  that  there  should  be  an  adaptation  in  the  Bible 
to  the  other  faculties  of  man's  nature;  but  most  intimately 
associated  with  that  nature  are  the  intellect,  the  imagination, 
the  affections,  and  the  will. 

Let  us,  then,  consider  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  t|je 
intellect  of  man.  Before  truth  can  reach  the  conscience 
and  the  affections  and  direct  the  will,  it  must  first  be  per- 
ceived by  the  intellect.  The  understanding  must  be  en- 
lightened, or  the  heart  cannot  be  reached.  Christianity  is  a 
system  of  great  truths ;  and  these  truths  must  be  apprehended, 
or  the  conscience  and  the  will  cannot  act.  Thus  we  see 
Christianity  comes  to  us  as  light  comes  to  the  material 
world.  The  very  design  of  the  Bible  is  to  chase  away  moral 
darkness.  One  of  its  chief  ends  is  to  correct  the  errors  of  a 
wrong  understanding.  But  how  is  this  to  be  done  ?  Evi- 
dently, by  the  communication  to  the  mind  of  new  truths, 
and  the  making  clearer  old  truths,  by  telling  us  what  the  un- 
aided light  of  nature  cannot  reveal,  and  making  more  sensible 
to  the  mind  those  truths  which  it  may  reveal.     Thus  we  find 

(419) 


420  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

the  Bible :  it  comes  to  us  not  as  the  enemj^  of  natural  re- 
ligion, not  to  oppose  or  supplant  it,  but  to  give  an  immeasur- 
able value  to  every  truth  of  nature,  and  then  to  supply  what 
it  is  most  essentially  deficient  in  by  new  truths  of  its  own. 
Christianity,  then,  is  adapted  to  the  intellect  in  that  it  tells 
us,  in  respect  to  all  moral  duties,  truths  more  clearly  than 
nature,  and  adds  others  peculiarly  its  own.  It  takes  every 
sound  timber  out  of  the  old  fabric  of  nature,  and  reconstructs  a 
new  temple  of  truth  with  every  material  available  in  the  old.  It 
gives  to  the  intellect  strength,  by  giving  to  it  light ;  it  greatly 
expands  the  mind,  by  giving  to  it  worthy  objects  of  contem- 
plation. As  food  nourishes  the  body,  so  do  the  truths  of  the 
Bible  nourish  the  mind  of  man,  imparting  vigor,  energy,  di- 
rectness of  application,  and  comprehension  of  thought.  But 
the  Bible  greatly  enlarges  the  intellect  by  the  variety  of  sub- 
jects upon  which  it  treats.  Commencing  with  the  fall  of 
man,  it  carries  the  understanding  through  ages  of  time,  even 
until  the  mediatorial  kingdom  of  Christ  is  delivered  up  unto 
the  Father.  From  the  infancy  of  humanity  to  its  highest 
maturity,  from  the  blissful  Eden  of  primeval  innocence  to 
the  last  closing  scenes  of  a  redemptive  process,  we  find  com- 
prehended an  epitome  of  maij's  history.  In  antiquity  no 
book  is  like  the  Bible.  Some  of  its  treatises  were  written 
far  beyond  the  age  of  Herodotus  ;  far  beyond  the  founding 
of  Greece  or  Rome ;  far  beyond  the  time  when  Homer  sang 
of  Ulysses  and  Priam  and  ruined  Troy;  far  beyond  any 
authentic  history  of  the  most  ancient  nations  of  Asia  or 
Africa.  Of  the  vast  interval  of  time  that  comprehended  the 
antediluvian  world,  of  those  centuries  that  elapsed  after  the 
flood  to  the  exodus  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt,  no  unin- 
spired history  can  give  any  intelligent  account.  All  is  in- 
volved in  fable  or  dreamy  speculation.  But  the  Bible,  briefly 
and  sufHciently  for  our  wants  if  not  for  our  curiosity,  has 
bridged  over  the  mighty  chasm  that  separates  authentic 
from  fabulous  history;  it  has  supplied  the  lost  links  in  that 
great  chain  essential  for  any  intelligent  comprehension  of 
man's  history  and  destiny.  Not  only  does  the  intellect  find 
this  great  want  supplied,  but  it  has   an    unbounded  field 


TO    THE  INTELLECT  AND   IMAGINATION.         421 

for  the  noblest  exercise  in  the  vast,  the  diversitied  and  deep 
truths  communicated. 

God  might  have  given  us  a  Bible  consisting  of  onl}^  one 
book,  and  yet  that  book  would  be  more  valuable  to  us,  as 
coming  from  God,  than  all  the  libraries  in  the  world;  but  he 
has  given  to  us,  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  sixty-six 
books.  These  treatises  are  written  in  everj  variety  of  stjde; 
they  are  composed  by  the  most  diverse  class  of  writers ;  they 
extend  over  a  period  of  sixteen  centuries,  and  yet  compre- 
hend, with  the  highest  adaptation  to  after-ages,  all  the  pecu- 
liarities of  language  and  customs  of  each  separate  period  of 
their  composition.  Particular  and  yet  general,  they  embody 
the  widest  latitude  of  style  with  the  greatest  beauty  of  lan- 
guage. No  uninspired  productions  have  equaled  the  Scrip- 
tures in  intellectual  merit.  In  poetry,  David  and  Isaiah,  in 
the  sublimity  of  their  subjects,  the  majesty  of  their  delinea- 
tions, far  excel  Homer,  Yirgil,  Dante,  or  Milton.  In  liistory 
no  book  can  compare  in  value  to  Genesis.  In  ethics  the  in- 
structions of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  in  respect  to  ever}-  duty 
of  man,  are  infinitely  superior  to  all  other  writings.  Who 
ever  in  philosophy  has  excelled  Paul  in  depth  or  clearness  ? 
It  is  not  only  in  the  higher  departments  of  literature  that  the 
Bible  is  so  superior,  but  also  in  the  more  delicate  and  refined 
descriptions  of  incidents  and  persons.  No  appeals  to  human 
sensibility  are  so  chaste  in  beauty  or  so  true  to  nature  as  those 
found  in  the  Scriptures.  No  story,  for  simplicit}^,  or  pathos, 
or  beauty  of  delineation,  has  yet  equaled  that  of  Joseph  and 
his  brethren  ;  or,  for  appropriateness  and  surpassing  direct- 
ness of  application,  Nathan's  parable  to  David.  Thus,  were 
the  Bible  looked  upon  only  as  a  book  for  the  intellect,  its  ab- 
sence could  not  be  supplied  by  all  other  books.  What  has 
so  waked  up  the  human  mind  as  the  Bible?  What  has  so 
absorbed  the  attention  of  all  thinkers  as  the  Scriptures  ? 
From  the  nursery,  where  childhood's  youngest  days  are  spent, 
to  manhood's  highest  development,  the  Bible  has  been  the 
book  of  books,  so  simple  and  clear  in  some  parts  that  an  in- 
fant can  understand,  and  in  others  so  deep,  so  profound  and 
mysterious,  as  to  baffle  the  keenness  of  an   angel's  vision; 


422  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

here  a  stream  so  lucid  and  gentle  that  a  child  may  cross 
unhurt,  and  there  an  ocean  of  thought  so  interminable  and 
so  majestic  as  to  elude  forever  all  human  discovery. 

But  the  chief  merit  of  the  Bible  as  a  production  for  the  in- 
tellect is  that  every  important  truth  of  immediate  utility  and 
pertaining  to  direct  duty,  either  to  man  or  to  God,  is  revealed 
with  the  utmost  clearness.  What  is  necessary  to  save  man 
as  a  sinner  and  make  him  better  for  this  world  and  lit  for 
heaven,  is  communicated  with  the  most  wonderful  appropri- 
ateness and  directness.  When  the  Bible  is  read,  there  is  some- 
thing in  its  style  so  unlike  that  of  all  other  books,  such  a  deep 
transparency  of  thought  in  respect  to  our  nature,  such  amazing 
sagacity  to  detect  all  the  windings  of  man's  heart,  a  wisdom 
so  unequaled  for  its  suitableness  to  the  everyday  duties  of 
life,  that  the  most  common  conviction  of  the  mind,  even  when 
the  evidence  of  miracles  and  of  prophecy  is  not  considered,  is, 
Such  a  book  must  proceed  frDm  God  himself.  Who  else  can 
produce  it?  Where  that  college  of  sages  existing  over  the 
long  period  of  sixteen  centuries,  who  could  have  composed 
the  Scriptures,  embodying  the  excellences  of  every  age  and 
adapted  to  the  wants  of  all, — whose  truths,  like  virgin  gold, 
are  unalloyed  with  error  and  absolutely  free  from  an}'  imper- 
fection ?  But  the  Bible  is  also  most  suitable  for  the  intel- 
lect in  that  it  closely  imitates  nature  in  its  composition. 
Look  to  the  material  world  ;  the  great  facts  of  science  do 
not  all  lie  upon  the  surface  of  things ;  running  through  all  the 
works  of  nature  there  is  a  vast  system,  or  order  of  arrange- 
ment; but  that  order  is  concealed  from  common  observers. 
The  mind  must  study  long  and  patientlj',  Avith  earnestness 
and  the  docility  of  a  child,  before  even  the  outlines  of  that 
mysterious  harmony  will  reveal  itself.  The  intellect  must  be 
tasked  before  it  can  grasp  even  the  rude  shadow  of  that  glo- 
rious order  that  reigns  triumphant  in  nature.  Here,  in  the 
universe  of  God's  works,  the  mind  of  man  may  wander  over 
riches  surpassing  all  thought ;  but  yet  that  mind  must  work. 
All  around  nature  profusely  spreads  her  unexhausted  stores ; 
but  they  come  not  to  man  without  his  own  exertion.  Just 
80  is  it  in  the  Bible.     Here  are  pearls  and  diamonds,  there 


TO    THE  INTELLECT  AND   HI  AGINATION.         423 

rubies  and  sapphire  stones,  and  gold  and  silver,  and  marble 
and  iron  ;  but  man  must  use  his  intellect  to  get  at  them ;  he 
must  work,  as  in  nature,  to  be  rich,  with  the  riches  of  the 
word  of  God.  These  treasures  lie  concealed  beneath  the  sur- 
face ;  they  call  for  vigorous  energy  to  secure  them  ;  and  never 
yet  did  an  earnest  mind  fail  in  having  a  reward.  Here  con- 
sists peculiarly  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the  intellect.  ISTo 
other  book  has  ever  so  awakened,  or  can  so  awaken,  man's 
thoughts.  How  noble  that  order,  that  all-comprehending 
system  that  reigns  in  nature!  How  divine  the  harmony  that 
exists  in  the  works  of  God !  But  the  Bible  reveals  to  the 
intellect  an  order  more  glorious  and  a  harmony  more  beau- 
tiful in  the  moral  world.  It  reveals  the  moral  law  extending 
over  angels  and  men,  with  a  wider  range  than  that  of  the 
mysterious  principle  of  attraction  that  keeps  planets  and  suns 
in  their  spheres.  It  reveals  a  system  of  redemption  far  more 
wonderful  than  nature's  greatest  truths. 

But  the  Bible  is  also  adapted  to  the  intellect  in  that  it 
reveals  the  best  kind  of  knowledge.  There  are  two  depart- 
ments of  knowledge.  One  has  reference  to  the  separate 
parts  that  go  to  make  up  the  whole,  and  the  other  to  the  ulti- 
mate design  of  the  whole.  The  former,  to  a  good  degree, 
may  be  attained  by  man  without  a  revelation  direct  from 
God ;  but  the  latter  is  altogether  beyond  human  cogni- 
zance. Thus,  a  man  may  tell  the  relation  the  bones  bear  to 
the  body,  and  how  the  process  of  digestion  is  carried  on,  or 
how  the  blood  flows  and  the  muscles  and  veins  are  connected 
with  the  body;  but  no  man,  without  a  divine  revelation,  can 
tell  the  great  end  of  existence,  or  the  ultimate  design  of  God 
in  creation,  or  what  should  be  the  chief  object  of  human  ex- 
istence. We  may  know  something  of  the  relations  of  parts 
to  the  whole,  but  not  the  ultimate  object  of  the  whole  itself. 
Here  man's  knowledge  must  fail  him,  when  he  attempts  to 
explain  the  great  mystery  of  the  end  of  man  in  creation, 
and  the  ultimate  design  of  the  redemptive  system,  coeval 
with  the  fall  of  maii ;  a  system  devised  from  eternity  by  God, 
and  destined  to  be  carried  on  through  higher  and  yet 
higher  stages  of  development,   until   the  redeemed  of  the 


424  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

human  family  shall  reach  a  stage  of  absolute  perfection; 
until  in  heaven  the  regenerated  family  of  man  shall  look 
back  upon  the  old  home  of  their  sorrow  and  sin  as  the  mari- 
ner upon  the  ocean  looks  upon  the  dim  and  far-distant  outlines 
of  some  barren  island  where  once  he  had  spent  days  of  ship- 
wreck and  of  trouble.  Such  a  system,  in  its  ultimate  end, 
cannot  be  apprehended  by  an  uninspired  mind.  It  demands 
a  knowledge  far  superior  to  human  power.  Thus  the  intel- 
lect, in  the  Bible,  is  impressed  not  only  with  the  beauty  of 
the  several  parts  that  go  to  make  up  the  whole,  but  with  the 
perfection  of  the  whole  and  the  design  of  the  system  of  Chris- 
tianity itself  The  mind  finds  in  the  Bible  a  system  old  as 
the  world,  coeval  with  man,  and  extending  through  successive 
stages  of  higher  development  to  the  last  hour  of  time;  a 
system  that  adjusts  itself  to  every  age  and  yet  is  equal  to  the 
wants  of  all  ages ;  a  system  rich  with  the  treasures  of  the 
Godhead,  and  alike  universal  in  its  sanctions  and  its  bless- 
ings ;  a  system  waking  up  the  mind  with  ideas  of  the  most 
amazing  grandeur,  and  presenting  for  action  the  most  pow- 
erful motives. 

The  Bible  is  also  peculiarl}-  adapted  to  the  intellect  in  that 
for  the  multitude  it  presents  the  most  useful  and  appropriate 
subjects  of  thought.  To  the  favored  few  of  wealth  and 
leisure  and  highly  cultivated  taste,  to  that  smaller  number 
who  are  giants  in  reason  and  scholarship,  no  book  is  more 
worthy  of  study  than  the  Bible ;  they  may  know  ever  so 
much,  but  there  are  fields  of  thought  in  the  Scriptures  that 
can  never  be  explored,  subjects  too  great  for  angels  to  grasp. 
But  the  mass  of  mankind  have  not  the  advantages  of  wealth 
and  learning.  The  pressing  calls  of  business,  and  those 
avocations  that  demand  constant  labor,  leave  but  little  time 
for  study  or  reading.  Now,  the  Bible  is  just  the  book  for 
the  multitude.  It  is  not  so  voluminous  as  to  require  for  its 
perusal  much  time,  or  so  exclusively  of  one  style  as  to  be 
unsuited  to  the  different  classes  of  minds.  Children  may  de- 
lischt  themselves  with  its  stories  and  histories;  the  more 
advanced  may  ever  meditate  with  profit  upon  its  moral  truths 
and  reasonings.    Some  may  please  themselves  more  with  the 


TO    THE  INTELLECT  AND   IMAGINATION.  425 

sympathy  and  patience  of  Job,  others  with  the  everyday  wis- 
dom of  Solomon.  Some  may  love  more  the  lofty  devotion 
of  David,  others  the  sublimity  of  Isaiah  or  Ezekiel.  The 
lover  of  narrative  may  be  more  attracted  by  the  books  of 
Moses,  while  the  keen  investigator  of  deep  things  may  find 
a  mine  of  gold  in  the  revelations  of  Daniel  and  John.  No- 
thing in  solemnity,  or  beauty,  or  appropriateness,  can  equal 
the  teachings  of  the  apostolic  epistles.  And  yet  there  is 
another  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  the  intellect  which  should 
never  be  omitted.  It  is  the  revelation  of  a  remedy  for  sin. 
This  has  been  alluded  to  in  considering  the  adaptation  of  the 
Bible  to  the  conscience;  but  there  is  a  natural  restlessness 
in  the  mind  of  man  in  connection  with  conscience,  that  needs 
something  to  moderate  the  anxiety  of  thought  that  arises 
under  the  consciousness  of  sin. 

In  nothing  is  the  Bible  more  appropriate  to  the  intellect 
than  in  that,  when  received  into  the  heart,  it  gives  peace  alike 
to  the  understanding  and  the  conscience.  Man  may  degrade 
himself  to  the  level  of  the  brutes  ;  he  may  practically  think 
and  act  as  if  eating  and  drinking  and  sleeping  and  hoard- 
ing up  money  constituted  the  chief  and  only  business  of  life; 
but  there  is  something  about  the  intellect  that  will  not  always 
be  cajoled  by  such  a  perversion  of  its  powers;  the  fires  of 
an  innate  immortality  will  at  times  blaze  forth,  and  the 
thoughts  restlessly  ponder  the  great  question  of  human  des- 
tiny. When,  then,  the  intellect  and  the  conscience  both  are 
awakened,  the  scoff  of  the  skeptic  or  the  sneer  of  the  infidel 
will  not  always  lull  into  slumber  with  the  delusive  idea  that 
death  is  an  eternal  sleep,  or  that  man  and  the  brute  differ 
only  in  respect  to  their  bodily  construction  or  animal  wants. 
When  the  mind  in  any  respect  apprehends  the  great  truth  of 
the  immortality  of  the  soul,  it  will  ponder  the  question  of 
its  probable  happiness  or  miser}^  in  the  future ;  it  will  medi- 
tate upon  the  nature  and  end  of  sin,  and  shrink  with  in- 
stinctive fear  from  its  legitimate  fruit.  The  intellect  of  man 
needs  not  only  the  Bible  to  show  how  it  may  attain  true 
peace,  but  it  needs  it  to  give  a  right  end  and  purpose  to  the 
mind. 


426  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

The  world  is  full  of  wasted  intellects,  genius  misapplied, 
aud  learning  abused.  Let  no  man  talk  of  the  waste  of 
money,  when  the  waste  of  mind  is  infinitely  greater.  While 
man  has  a  soul,  he  must  think;  before  thought  can  be 
stopped,  the  mind  itself  must  be  annihilated.  The  question 
is  not  whether  a  mind  shall  think,  that  is  already  settled, 
but  hoio  it  shall  think.  Shall  man  immortal  think  only  of 
his  animal  wants,  the  gratification  of  his  sensual  nature,  or 
shall  he  think  upon  his  destiny  for  two  worlds,  upon  God 
and  Christ,  and  being  good,  and  fitting  himself  for  a  holier 
and  better  state  than  this  life?  If  such  subjects  should 
awaken  attention  and  employ  the  thoughts  of  man,  then  for 
such  an  object  the  Bible  is  alike  the  greatest  and  the  best  of 
books. 

The  Bible  is  adapted  equally  to  the  imagination.  Says 
Stewart,  "  The  faculty  of  the  imagination  is  the  great 
spring  of  human  activity,  and  the  principal  source  of  human 
improvement.  As  it  delights  in  presenting  to  the  mind 
scenes  and  characters  more  perfect  than  those  which  we  are 
acquainted  with,  it  prevents  us  from  ever  being  completely 
satisfied  with  our  present  condition  or  with  our  past  attain- 
ments, and  engages  us  continually  in  the  pursuit  of  some  un- 
tried enjoyment  or  of  some  ideal  excellence."  Again  he 
says,  "  Tired  and  disgusted  with  this  world  of  imperfection, 
we  delight  to  escape  to  another,  of  the  poets'  creation,  where 
the  charms  of  nature  wear  an  eternal  bloom,  and  where 
scenes  of  enjoyment  are  opened  up  to  us  suited  to  the  vast 
capacities  of  the  human  mind." 

The  imagination  may  be  looked  upon  as  a  source  of  enjoy- 
ment and  principle  of  activity.  In  one  respect  it  gives  the 
highest  pleasure,  in  another  it  inspires  to  action  and  exists 
as  an  eflicient  agent  in  moulding  the  human  character.  God 
has  given  to  man  no  impertinent  faculty.  In  the  material 
world  we  find  that  beauty  is  consulted  as  much  as  utility. 
Flowers  are  not  suitable  for  food,  but  they  are  none  the  less 
good  in  their  place.  They  are  a  high  source  of  pleasure; 
their  beauty  pleases  the  eye,  and  their  fragrance  the  sense 
of  smell.     Now,  the  imagination  is  a  faculty  that  loves  to 


TO    THE  INTELLECT  AND   IMAGINATION.         427 

form  ideal  pictures  of  loveliness  and  joy.  How  airy  are  its 
castles  in  youth  !  How  is  manhood  charmed  with  its  crea- 
tions ! 

The  question,  then,  is.  How  shall  the  imagination  God  has 
given  to  man  be  most  suitablj'  employed  ?  "Where  shall  it 
iind  its  purest  enjoyment  and  its  noblest  sphere  of  activity  ? 
In  the  Bible,  is  the  reply.  How  often  has  an  ill-regulated 
fancy  engendered  the  worst  mischief  to  the  mind !  How 
often  have  its  feverish  dreams  embittered  the  sweets  of  life 
and  unfitted  for  active  duty  !  How  often  has  its  improper 
exercise  created  a  sickly  sensibility,  and  nourished  a  mental 
disease  as  pernicious  as  au}^  malady  that  ever  has  affected 
the  body !  But  in  the  Bible,  while  the  imagination  has  the 
widest  scope,  there  are  innumerable  checks  to  its  unlawful 
rovings.  Here  every  element  of  beauty  is  brought  into  re- 
quisition, and  infinitely  nobler  paintings  than  nature  can 
offer.  Here  a  richer  rainbow  of  colors  spans  the  sky  than 
man  ever  saw  arching  the  material  heavens.  Here  the  judg- 
ment day  and  the  resurrection  morn,  here  the  world  en- 
veloped in  one  sheeted  flame,  and  the  archangel's  trump,  and 
the  Son  of  God  descending  from  the  skies,  and  the  great 
white  throne,  and  angels  innumerable,  and  myriads  of  hu- 
man beings,  are  the  themes  for  contemphition.  Where  such 
another  field  for  the  imagination  ?  where  other  elements  of 
such  sublimity  and  transcendent  glory?  The  imagination 
needs  realities  to  dwell  upon, — not  dreams.  There,  in  the 
Bible,  are  living  certainties  surpassing  the  highest  stretch  of 
thought.  Here  "eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither 
have  entered  into  the  heart  of  man,  the  things  which  God 
hath  prepared  for  them  that  love  him." 

But  the  Bible  is  adapted  to  the  imagination  in  that  it  gives 
perfect  models  for  imitation.  Thus,  it  is  peculiarly  con- 
structed as  a  formative  power  to  the  imagination  ;  it  regulates 
it,  moulds  it  into  a  proper  shape,  and  preserves  it  from  false 
standards  of  character.  No  language  can  describe  the  mis- 
chief engendered  by  the  imagination  degrading  virtues  into 
vices  and  elevating  vices  into  virtues ;  and  yet  the  whole 
heathen  mythology  is  full  of  this  inversion  of  moral  traits. 


428  ADAPTATION  OF  THE  BIBLE 

"Witness  the  pagan  representations  of  heaven,  the  specuha- 
tions  of  Plato  respecting  a  future  state,  the  Hindoo  system 
and  transmigration  of  souls,  and  the  paradise  of  Mohammed. 
How  impure  and  unnatural  the  heathen  gods  !  How  debasing 
their  morality  !  How  pernicious  their  influence  upon  the 
mind!  Now,  the  most  marked  effect  of  the  Bible  upon  the 
imagination  is,  it  purifies  while  it  strengthens  it;  it  retines 
and  3'et  regulates  it.  It  exerts  a  mighty  power  in  preserving- 
it  from  the  seductive  charms  of  sense  and  time  keeping  it 
from  the  corruption  of  the  world  while  elevating  it  above  the 
world.  Thus,  the  imagination,  by  reading  the  Bible,  is  not 
only  kept  from  Utopian  dreams,  but  exists  in  the  soul  as  a 
deep  incentive  to  useful  action.  Coming  in  contact  with  the 
mind  of  God,  dwelling  upon  holy  and  divine  themes,  it 
catches  the  immortal  fire  of  heaven,  warm  with  the  flame  of 
the  sacred  altar;  it  stimulates  the  dormant  faculties  of  the 
soul,  gives  new  strength  to  the  afl'ections  and  new  energy  to 
the  will.  Thus  the  Christian  martja'  serenely  encounters 
the  torture  of  the  stake,  and  sings  hymns  of  victory  upon 
the  gibbet  and  the  rack.  Thus,  when  pagan  persecution 
became  hot  as  Nebuchadnezzar's  furnace,  even  women  and 
children  welcomed  death,  and  the  aged  and  the  infirm  exult- 
ingly  gave  themselves  up  to  the  civil  power.  Thus,  under 
the  cruel  sway  of  papal  bigotr}-,  we  read  of  the  heroic  firm 
ness  of  the  Waldenses  and  the  Albigenses,  and  the  noble 
army  of  Huguenot  martyrs,  and  Scotland's  bravest  sons.  Call 
this,  if  you  please,  an  excited  imagination;  it  was  an  imagi- 
nation with  reason  for  its  guide  and  God  for  its  end.  It  was 
an  imagination  purified  by  fine  gold,  and  as  superior  to  the 
cold  and  selfish  maxims  of  the  world  as  heaven  is  higher 
than  the  earth.  It  was  an  imagination  reposing  on  no 
damask  cushions,  regaled  with  no  voluptuous  incense,  and 
dwelling  in  no  marble  palace,  but  disciplined  in  the  rough 
school  of  adversity,  with  the  storm-cradle  of  war  for  its 
couch,  and  hunger  and  nakedness  for  its  daily  lot. 

Call  not  that  of  human  origin  that  can  so  elevate  man 
above  this  earth  ;  say  not  that  a  book  that  can  so  reach  every 
faculty  of  man  can  be  the  fruit  of  uninspired  wisdom.     Go, 


TO    THE  INTELLECT  AND   IMAGINATION.         429 

if  not  yet  convinced,  to  the  death-bed  of  the  Christian,  and 
witness  amid  the  dissolutions  of  nature  the  last  utterances  of 
the  good.  Observe  the  smile  that  lights  up  the  countenance 
ere  yet  the  spirit  has  left  the  body;  meditate  upon  the  hope, 
the  peace,  the  faith,  and  the  joy  that  leave  their  last  impress 
upon  that  countenance  now  fixed  in  the  slumber  of  the  grave ; 
and  then  think  not  strange  the  exclamation  of  a  celebrated 
intidel,  when  questioned  by  his  child  in  whose  system  he 
should  believe,  m  Afs  or  that  of  her  Christian  mother :  "Believe, 
my  child,  in  the  religion  of  your  mother  T' 


CHAPTER   XIV. 

MORAL    POWER    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

In  the  two  kinds  of  evidence  that  exert  an  influence  upon 
the  heart,  we  see  that  the  evidence  which  convinces  the  rea- 
son differs  only  from  that  which  satisfies  the  feelings  by  the 
mode  in  which  it  is  apprehended.  Reason  arrives  at  proof  by 
a  slow  process,  the  affections  by  a  quick  process ;  the  former 
is  protracted  in  time,  the  latter  immediate.  The  sphere  of 
the  one  is  the  intellect,  that  weighs  and  compares  arguments; 
the  other  the  moral  sensibilities,  that  instinctively  decide 
upon  the  question  of  right  and  wrong,  of  fitness  or  unfitness. 
The  sensibilities  are  intimately  affected  by  whatever  pertains 
to  moral  beauty  and  harmony,  just  as  we  see  in  a  harp  that 
the  kind  of  music  given  is  made  to  depend  upon  the  skill 
and  delicacy  of  the  touch  of  the  hand.  Thus  with  the  moral 
sensibilities:  some  foreign  power  must  reach  those  sensibili- 
ties and  come  in  contact  with  them,  before  there  comes  forth 
a  response. 

The  first  evidence  of  the  moral  power  of  Christianity  upon 
the  human  soul  is  shown  in  the  exclusive  supremacy  it  gives 
to  God,  and  the  infinite  authority  of  his  will  to  control  our 
conduct.  When,  then,  the  Bible  is  welcomed  into  the  heart 
of  man,  the  intellect  pronounces  that  such  an  authority  has 
to  support  it,  in  the  Bible,  sufficient  evidence  for  belief;  and 
the  sensibilities  pronounce  a  decision  in  favor  of  the  right- 
ness  and  fitness  of  such  an  authority.  Consequently,  Christi- 
anity reveals  itself  as  a  power,  a  divine  power,  lajdng  alike  its 
sanctions  upon  the  reason  and  the  affections,  compelling  the 
one  to  assent  to  the  divine  truth  of  the  Bible,  and  the  other 
to  admit  the  divine  excellence  of  the  Bible.  Thus  is  there 
made  known  a  power  bringing  into  captivity  the  thoughts 
(430) 


MORAL  POWER    OF  CHRISTIANITY.  431 

and  feelings  to  the  obedience  of  Christ,  and  leading  the  rea- 
son and  the  conscience  to  the  condition  of  submission  to  the 
authority  of  God.  It  is  in  this  respect  that  religion  owes  its 
very  meaning.  Its  derivation,  from  the  two  words  re  and  ligo^ 
is  to  bind  anew,  or  bind  over  again.  Thus  Christianity  as  a 
religion  evinces  its  power  in  binding  anew  the  mind  and 
heart  to  the  service  of  God,  and  urging  to  a  cordial  obedience 
the  reason  and  the  conscience,  throwing  over  both  the  com- 
mianding  sanctions  of  a  superior  power,  and  leading  to  its  re- 
ception from  the  conviction  of  the  transcendent  excellence  of 
the  divine  will.  It. is  this  peculiarity  that  distinguishes  the 
Bible  from  uninspired  productions.  When  we  read  the 
words  of  a  man,  we  find  that,  resting  upon  no  higher  au- 
thority than  human  reason,  we  are  at  liberty  to  treat  those 
words  according  to  that  common  standard  by  which  we 
measure  one  man  by  another  or  compare  ourselves  with 
others  of  mankind.  But  when  we  read  the  words  of  God 
the  case  is  altogether  difi'erent:  we  come  then  to  a  standard 
of  belief  and  practice  as  far  above  man  as  God  himself  is 
above  the  creature.  Here  we  see  a  power  revealed  by  which 
anew  the  reason  and  the  conscience  are  bound,  a  power  that 
rests  itself  upon  omnipotence  and  a  wisdom  as  boundless 
as  the  universe. 

Such  is  the  manner  in  which  Christianity  comes  to  us.  It 
comes  making  known  to  the  reason  and  the  sensibilities  a 
standard  of  belief  and  practice  that  embodies  in  it  not  only 
a  divine  authority,  but  a  revelation  of  that  which  is  as  supe- 
rior to  the  unassisted  light  of  nature  as  heaven  is  higher 
than  the  earth.  Consequently,  we  see  in  the  Bible  a  sacred- 
ness  that  is  absent  in  any  production  of  man.  There  are 
gleams  and  flashes  in  it  of  a  divine  light.  We  discover  in 
its  representations  of  human  nature  a  handwriting  so  pecu- 
liar as  to  baffle  alike  the  ingenuity  of  man  to  imitate  or  invent, 
— such  a  deep  transparency  of  wisdom,  such  inimitable  con- 
ciseness and  yet  comprehensiveness  of  thought,  that  the  mind 
of  man  seems  to  come,  as  it  were,  into  the  presence-chamber 
of  the  Deity  and  see  there  reflected  from  its  walls  the  bright- 
ness of  his  glory.     The  moral  power  of  Christianity  is  seen, 


432  MORAL  POWER    OF  CHRISTIAN.! TF. 

like  a  mighty  magnet,  drawing  to  itself  tlie  endless  diversi- 
ties of  human  thought  and  feehng,  infusing  into  the  soul  of 
man  a  new  Hfe,  urging  to  duty  by  new  ties,  and  controlling 
with  heavenly  sanctions  every  conflicting  element  of  the  na- 
ture of  man.  Another  evidence  of  the  moral  power  of  Chris- 
tianity is  manifested  in  the  harmony  it  preserves  between 
reason  and  faith.  No  word  has  been  so  misused  as  the  word 
faith  in  relation  to  the  Bible  and  to  Christ.  Because  faith 
has  its  own  peculiar  sphere,  it  has  often  been  imagined  that 
it  is  opposed  to  the  reason,  or  in  its  nature  hostile  to  it; 
but  such  an  objection  would  be  equally  valid  against  the 
afl:ections.  There  is  nothing  in  faith  opposed  to  right 
reason;  it  is  only  when  reason  is  perverted,  when  it  is  abused 
and  transcends  its  sphere,  that  any  issue  exists  between  the 
two.  True  faith  is  the  result  of  the  reason  and  the  sensibili- 
ties submitting  to  the  reality  of  good  evidence  in  the  Bible 
to  prove  it  from  God.  It  is  simply  the  affectionate  assent 
of  the  mind  to  revealed  truths  so  entire  as  to  lead  to  right 
practice.  There  can  be  no  true  faith  without  the  exercise  of 
the  reason,  any  more  than  without  the  exercise  of  the  sensi- 
bilities ;  both  are  necessary  for  the  existence  even  of  faith. 

Such  being  the  fact,  the  power  of  Christianity  is  peculiarly 
displayed  in  the  harmony  it  institutes  with  faith  and  all  the 
faculties  of  the  soul.  The  error  of  skepticism  is  that  it  over- 
looks the  true  sphere  of  reason,  while  that  of  superstition  is 
that  it  binds  it  in  its  sphere.  The  one  makes  reason  a  home- 
less fugitive  without  a  guide;  the  other,  a  timorous  slave 
trembling  under  the  lash  of  a  tyrant.  Thus  it  will  be  seen 
that  while  the  one  drives  reason  over  a  sea  of  doubts,  the 
other  imprisons  it  upon  a  desolate  island.  But  Christianity 
avoids  both  extremes,  and  preserves  a  happy  medium  be- 
tween the  two.  Does  not  reason  find  in  revelation  a  bound- 
less field  for  activity  ?  Is  it  not  there  treated  as  a  friend  ? 
Is  anything  demanded  of  it  that  is  not  most  suitable?  Is  it 
not  right  that  reason  should  not  go  out  of  its  sphere  and  re- 
ject facts  because  of  the  difiiculties  connected  with  those 
facts  ?  "When  belief  upon  the  highest  reason  is  demanded, 
should  reason  object? 


3I0BAL  FOWEB    OF  CHRISTIANITY.  433 

"What,  then,  is  the  rehition  that  faith  sustains  to  reason  and 
the  sensibilities  in  the  Bible  ?  There  are  two  kinds  of  evi- 
dence to  these  two  parts  of  our  nature  to  show  it  from  God. 
Upon  the  great  question  of  what  is  right,  what  in  its  nature 
is  fit  and  suitable,  the  sensibilities  give  an  immediate  re- 
sponse in  favor  of  the  Bible.  They  declare  that  it  is  right 
that  God  should  command  and  man  obej",  that  it  is  suitable 
to  practice  the  precepts  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and 
good  to  do  that  which  they  demand  of  us  toward  God  and 
man.  There  is  a  moral  beauty  in  the  Bible  that  the  sensi- 
bilities instinctively  perceive;  there  is  a  correspondence  to 
the  laws  of  our  being  that  they  at  once  recognize.  They  feel 
that  the  divine  law  should  tolerate  no  sin,  and  that  its  sanc- 
tions are  founded  in  justice  ;  however  indisposed  by  sin, 
they  must  yet  confess  the  purity  and  excellence  of  Christ. 
There  is  such  a  divine  goodness  about  the  Bible,  such  a 
sympathy  with  man  as  a  fallen  being,  such  an  interest  dis- 
played in  his  welfare,  such  a  solicitude  to  heal  his  spiritual 
maladies,  that  the  sensibilities  must  feel  that  the  Bible  is  the 
best  of  books.  The  reason  also,  when  it  uses  appropriately 
the  varied  instruments  which  God  has  placed  in  its  hands  to 
detect  falsehood  from  truth,  finds  in  the  Bible  no  contradic- 
tion in  recorded  facts,  and  no  error  in  principles.  All  the 
evidences  from  miracles  and  prophecy  are  found  to  be  valid. 
Reason  is  obliged  to  assent  not  only  to  the  reality  of  the 
proof,  but  to  the  greatness  of  the  proof. 

There  is  in  the  Bible  a  combined  power  of  evidence,  ac- 
cumulating with  every  age,  and  growing  brighter  and 
brighter  with  the  flight  of  time.  What,  then,  is  the  relation 
that  faith  in  the  Bible  sustains  both  to  reason  and  the  sensi- 
bilities? Reason  and  the  sensibilities  having  evidence  enough 
to  prove  the  Bible  from  God,  it  only  remains  that  the  heart 
should  believe  it  such,  and  practice  what  it  believes.  The 
moral  power  of  Christianity  is  seen  in  that  it  ennobles  both 
the  reason  and  the  sensibilities  and  harmonizes  both.  The 
sensibilities  it  makes  pure,  the  reason  it  exalts.  It  recon- 
ciles both.  Conscience  finding  in  revelation  a  right  standard, 
and  reason  a  sufficient  evidence,  by  a  true  belief  they  both 

28 


434  MORAL  POWER    OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

move  on  in  unison.  IS'o  higher  proof  can  there  be  to  the 
soul  of  the  divine  power  of  the  Bible,  than  the  peace  it  gives 
to  the  conscience,  and  the  assurance  it  imparts  to  the  reason. 
Man,  as  a  fallen  being,  as  a  sinner  before  God,  carries  about 
in  his  heart  discordant  elements,  a  state  of  perpetual  dis- 
quietude, and  a  ceaseless  conflict  in  the  sensibilities  and  the 
reason.  Conscience  feels  the  existence  of  sin,  and  the  reason 
proves  it. 

Another  illustration  of  the  power  of  Christianity  is  dis- 
played in  the  treatment  of  those  sensibilities  of  our  nature 
that  show  human  accountability.  There  are  in  our  nature 
religious  wants  that  must  be  satisfied,  a  deep  apprehension 
of  the  justice  of  that  Being  before  whose  tribunal  the  con- 
duct must  pass  for  scrutiny  and  the  deeds  of  a  whole  life  be 
examined. 

Human  nature  must  be  annihilated  before  those  sensibili- 
ties that  speak  of  obligation  to  the  Deity,  and  that  mysterious 
relation  that  man  sustains  to  God,  can  be  destroyed.  Amid 
the  grossest  errors  of  superstition,  or  the  blind  groping  of 
skepticism,  man  yet  carries  about  in  his  own  heart  that 
which  tells  of  duty  to  a  superior  Being  and  unfolds  a  dread 
accountability  to  the  infinite  Creator  of  body  and  spirit. 
In  nothing  is  the  power  of  Christianity  more  clearly  seen 
than  in  the  cultivation  of  this  religious  sense  in  man,  and 
the  careful  fostering  of  those  sensibilities  that  distinguish 
him  from  the  brutes.  When  Christianity  speaks  to  our 
moral  nature,  it  touches  upon  that  which  at  once  reveals  its 
divine  source.  Amid  the  endless  diversities  of  human  char- 
acter, it  speaks  of  the  greatness  of  man's  spiritual  wants 
and  the  efficacj^  of  the  remedy  as  revealed  in  Christ.  Chris- 
tianity presents  the  only  true  sphere  for  the  moral  nature  of 
man.  Away  from  God,  reason  becomes  dark,  and  the  sensi- 
bilities corrupt.  As  the  moral  nature  departs  at  a  greater 
distance  from  him,  there  reigns  within  a  wider  anarchy,  or  a 
more  debasing  bondage  to  error.  Christianit}^  tends  directly 
to  reverse  this  downward  progress :  it  counteracts  the  repul- 
sive power  of  sin  that  alike  darkens  the  intellect  and  corrupts 
the  heart.     "With  mighty  attraction  it  brings  it  back  to  the 


MORAL  POWER   OF  CHRISTIANITY.  435 

genial  warmth  of  the  suu,  it  melts  that  ice  which  encircles  the 
heart,  it  penetrates  with  its  warm  beams  the  frozen  regions 
of  spiritual  death,  and  creates  the  verdure  of  summer  where 
once  ruled  the  desolation  of  winter. 

But  the  peculiar  power  of  Christianity  is  seen  in  the  inti- 
mate alliance  with  it  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  It  was  the  co- 
operation of  the  Eternal  Spirit  that  first  indited  the  words  of 
the  Bible,  and  gives  such  energy  to  the  truth  of  God.  He  is 
a  discerner  of  the  thoughts ;  with  infinite  sagacity  he  brings 
to  the  conscience  and  the  reason  the  truths  of  the  Bible,  and 
compels  us  to  look  to  the  faithful  exhibition  of  our  own 
hearts.  Our  motives  are  weighed  in  the  balances  ;  our  most 
secret  thoughts  are  scanned  ;  the  deepest  recesses  of  our 
souls  are  laid  open  to  our  inspection.  To  make  us  know 
ourselves  is  as  much  the  aim  of  Christianity  as  to  lead  us  to 
the  knowledge  of  God.  Thus,  the  power  of  Christianity  is 
shown  by  leading  the  heart  to  the  knowledge  of  itself  and 
the  knowledge  of  God,  leading  to  th'e  renunciation  of  sin, 
imparting  to  the  soul  new  hopes,  and  throwing  over  every 
relation  of  life  new  sanctions.  Man,  a  sinner,  through  a 
divine  influence  finds  strength  to  resist  temptation,  courage 
to  contend  with  difficulties,  and  hope  to  inspire  to  effort. 
Thus  there  begins  in  the  soul  a  reverse  movement  from  sin. 
That  fatal  attraction  of  a  corrupt  nature  that  once  kept  from 
the  service  of  God  is  exchanged  for  that  other  attraction  that 
draws  the  heart  to  God,  leading  nearer  and  yet  nearer  to  the 
fountain-source  of  heaven's  love,  the  peace  of  conscience, 
and  the  enjoyments  of  that  which  surpasses  all  thought  to 
describe.  The  Holy  Spirit  always  acts  in  unison  with  the 
Sacred  Scriptures ;  he  teaches  no  revelation  not  compre- 
hended in  the  Bible;  being  the  embodiment  of  the  mind  of 
God,  he  takes  of  the  inspired  word  and  impresses  that  word 
upon  the  heart  of  man,  writing  it  as  it  were  upon  the  table 
of  the  soul  with  the  point  of  a  diamond,  and  inscribing  in 
legible  characters  those  immutable  truths  contained  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

Thus  the  power  of  Christianity  is  seen  by  bringing  the 
sensibilities  and  the  reason  into  a  condition  of  obedience  to 


436  MORAL  POWEB   OF  CHBISTIANITY. 

God.  As  a  messenger  from  heaven,  the  Bible  comes  to  us 
revealing  Christ  our  Saviour,  and  opening  up  to  the  lost 
family  of  man  the  way  to  eternal  life.  It  urges  us  to  listen 
to  the  voice  of  our  best  friend  and  hear  the  entreaties  of  that 
celestial  wisdom  that  would  secure  for  us  the  immortality  of 
the  sons  of  God,  and  warns  us  not  to  reject  our  noblest 
security,  and  that  salvation  purchased  for  us  by  the  blood 
of  Christ. 

The  moral  power  of  Christianity  is  also  seen  in  its  direct 
effects  upon  society,  and  its  remote  influences.  Its  power 
has  been  contemplated  upon  the  individual  heart.  Observe, 
now,  how  society  is  made  to  feel  its  presence.  The  religion 
of  Christ  is  peculiarly  the  light  of  the  world.  It  has  in  it 
the  truth  that  is  able  to  make  wise  unto  salvation.  Its  power 
is  seen  in  every  community  where  it  exists,  in  raising  the 
standard  of  moral  excellence  and  suppressing  the  more  vi- 
cious inroads  of  selfishness.  Thus,  when  those  lands  where 
the  Bible  is  read  and  Christ's  religion  prevails  are  contrasted 
with  the  regions  that  are  destitute  of  Christianity,  we  see  at 
once  a  marked  superiority  in  all  that  advances  the  welfare  of 
man.  What  is  it  but  the  moral  power  of  Christianity  that  has 
•  relieved  the  horrors  of  war,  that  has  suppressed  the  evils  of 
slavery,  or  checked  the  ravages  of  intemperance  ?  What  is 
it  but  Christianity  that  has  discountenanced  every  form  of 
licentiousness,  and  thrown  in  every  age  its  shield  of  protec- 
tion over  the  most  sacred  relations  of  the  family  and  the 
rights  of  woman  ?  What  is  it  but  Christianity  that  has  curbed 
the  violence  of  war,  or  given  moderation  to  civil  rulers,  or 
guided  with  safety  human  governments,  or  repressed  the 
arrogance  of  party  spirit?  Christianity  has  changed,  where- 
ever  it  has  prevailed,  the  whole  condition  of  society.  By 
making  supreme  the  authority  of  God,  it  has  most  effectually 
put  down  the  tyranny  of  man,  and  given  a  sure  foundation 
to  all  the  virtues.  By  revealing  a  Saviour  from  sin,  it  has 
satisfied  the  demands  of  conscience,  and  opened  up  to  the 
soul  an  immortality  and  blessedness  beyond  the  grave.  Thus 
has  this  power  effected  the  reconciliation  of  man  to  God, 
broken  down  that  wall  of  adamant  that  separates  the  sinner 


MOEAL  POWEB   OF  CHRISTIANITY.  437 

from  the  Deity,  and  thrown  upon  the  path  of  the  sincere 
believer  the  full  blaze  of  heaven's  glory.  How  great,  then, 
the  responsibility  the  very  existence  of  Christianity  brings 
with  it!  It  places  man  upon  a  new  trial  for  his  happiness, 
and  binds  him  to  the  performance  of  duties  that  no  ingenuity 
can  evade,  no  hatred  escape.  Those  duties  rest  upon  us 
wherever  we  may  go  ;  and,  ever  present,  man  has  no  other 
alternative  than  to  obey  and  be  saved,  or  disobey  and  be  lost. 

With  the  highest  meaning  the  words  come  to  us,  as  once 
they  came  to  the  woman  of  Samaria : 

"  Jesus  said  unto  her,  I  am  the  resurrection  and  the  life ; 
he  that  believeth  in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he 
live." 


CHAPTER   XV. 

THE    HARMONY   OF    SCIENCE   AND    REVELATION. 

We  can  couceive  of  no  greater  injury  to  the  cause  of 
Christianity  than  the  over-zealous  effort  to  represent  the 
investigations  of  science  as  opposed  to  revehxtiou.  Science 
is  a  record  of  facts;  and  what  is  revelation  but  a  record 
of  facts  ?  The  student  of  science  may  be  in  error  in  what 
he  believes  to  be  the  record  of  facts;  and  what  is  to  prevent 
the  student  of  revelation  from  being  in  error  also  in  respect 
to  some  of  its  facts  ?  Why  is  the  human  mind  more  infallible 
in  the  one  than  in  the  other?  "Why  does  the  interpreter  of 
Scripture  assume  that  his  system  of  interpretation  in  all 
things  is  necessarily/  right,  and  that  of  those  who  in  honesty 
differ  from  him  is  wrong  ?  It  is  of  the  very  essence  of  dog- 
matism to  pronounce  without  examination  upon  the  inter- 
pretation of  another,  while  it  eulogizes  its  own  as  the  only 
correct  one.  Especially  is  this  so  when  the  subjects  proposed 
for  discussion  are  recondite  and  not  of  vital  consequence; 
when  diversity  of  view  may  be  held  without  any  departure 
from  essential  truth ;  when  minute  coincidences  and  subtle 
distinctions  only  are  called  in  question  ;  when  no  one  promi- 
nent doctrine  of  the  Bible  is  doubted  or  denied ;  when  there 
is  only  a  difference  of  sentiment  upon  views  of  altogether 
inferior  importance,  and  which  should  only  be  treated  with 
moderation  or  dissented  from  with  good  temper.  But,  most 
unnecessarily,  it  happens  that  when  the  lover  of  science  pro- 
pounds, as  did  Galileo  or  Copernicus,  views  somewhat  differ- 
ent from  the  common  interpretation,  there  is  often,  with  over- 
heated theological  partisans,  an  alarm  raised,  as  if  the  whole 
Bible  was  in  its  credibility  endangered,  and  in  its  very  foun- 
dations undermined.  But  the  difficulty  is,  they  were  wrong, 
and  not  their  Scriptures.  It  is  their  interpretation  that  is  er- 
(438) 


HARMONY  OF  SCIENCE  AND   REVELATION.      439 

roneous,  and  not  the  Bible.  Why  should  every  new  discovery 
in  the  sciences  be  hailed  as  the  harbinger  of  evil,  and  a  new 
truth  made  known  be  regarded  as  an  obtrusive  novelty?  The 
Bible  is  no  suspicious  character,  deprecating  the  steps  of  every 
adventurer  in  knowledge  ;  it  thunders  no  anathema  against 
the  student  of  science.  Free  as  the  air  itself,  generous  as 
the  maguiiicent  variety  of  nature,  noble  as  its  great  Author, 
it  offers  itself  for  the  deepest,  the  widest,  the  most  searching 
scrutiny ;  it  fears  no  foe,  and  it  compromises  with  no  enemy  ; 
it  has  no  retraction  to  make,  and  no  chain  to  fetter  the 
loftiest  stretch  of  human  thought.  But  it  does,  with  reason, 
demand  that  thought  should  be  lawful  and  investigation 
true, — that  the  lover  of  science  should  be  humble  before  the 
iniinite  Author  of  science,  and  treat  with  deference  the  un- 
equivocal assertions  of  revelation.  It  does  demand  that 
unripe  speculation  should  not  be  indorsed  as  truth,  nor  infant 
theories  be  worshiped  as  the  maturity  of  knowledge.  Let 
us,  first,  ask  ourselves.  What  is  the  attitude  of  the  Bible 
toward  science  ?  what  ground  does  it  take  ?  Everything  de- 
pends upon  a  correct  answer  to  this  question.  The  business 
of  revelation  has  especial  reference  to  all  moral  duty,  to 
our  relations,  as  responsible  beings,  to  God  and  man.  All 
truth  made  known  has  immediate  bearing  upon  this  point. 
Here  is  the  dividing  line  between  essential  and  unessential 
truth.  Whatever  has  a  moral  aspect — whatever  relates  to 
God  or  to  man — is  essential.  Beyond  this  point  truth  made 
known  is  incidental  ;  and  views,  correct  or  incorrect,  upon 
such  truths,  never  should  be  regarded  as  of  vital  importance. 
Now,  all  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Bible  are  intimately 
connected  with  duties  toward  God  and  man,  and  therefore 
come  under  that  which  it  is  essential  to  receive.  A  man  if  he 
does  not  breathe  the  air  will  die ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that 
death  will  result  from  his  wearing  a  red  coat  rather  than  a  black 
one.  To  demand  a  rigid  and  undeviating  uniformity  upon  the 
minutiffi  of  revelation,  an  exact  agreement  upon  all  unessential 
truth,  is  asking  too  much  of  human  nature.  So  long  as  God 
has  made  minds  to  differ,  and  constitutional  varieties  of 
thought  as  much  as  of  body,  it  follows  that  there  must  be  dif- 


440  THE  HARMONY  OF 

ferences  of  opinion  upon  the  niinutiee  of  the  Bible.  The 
Bible  treats  all  scientific  truth  as  pertaining  to  the  minutiae 
of  revelation ;  it  treats  it  as  unessential  for  uniformity  of 
belief.  All  moral  duty  and  right  belief  upon  Christ  are 
of  the  utmost  importance;  but  not  so  with  the  discoveries 
of  science ;  not  so  with  the  beauties  of  art  or  the  embellish- 
ments of  poetry  ;  not  so  with  the  graces  of  style  or  the 
closeness  of  logic.  It  is  the  Christian  infinitely  more  in  his 
heart  than  in  his  speculative  notions  that  is  looked  at;  his 
uprightness  of  conduct,  more  than  his  expansion  of  mind. 
Consequently,  with  revelation  the  greatest  heresy  is  wicked- 
ness, and  the  worst  infidelity  a  bad  life.  And  yet,  while  re- 
garding mainly  the  conduct,  the  right  reception  of  the  Bible 
leads  directly  to  uniformity  of  belief  upon  all  essential  truth. 
The  Bible  uses  popular  language  upon  all  subjects.  The 
precision  of  the  metaphysicians  can  be  obtained  only  by 
adopting  their  abstrnseness  of  language.  Their  exactness  is 
purchased  at  the  expense  of  clearness.  But  would  it  be 
proper  for  the  Bible,  made  for  all  ages  and  all  men,  to  make 
use  of  a  dialect  unintelligible  to  ninety-nine  hundredths  of  the 
human  family?  Would  it  be  proper  for  God  to  exchange 
adaptation  for  exclusiveness,  compactness  for  indefinite  ex- 
pansion, and  that  golden  coin  current  among  all  nations  for 
bills  of  credit  valueless  beyond  a  limited  circle?  Would  it 
be  proper  to  throw^  away  in  popular  language  a  medium  of 
thought  as  universal  as  the  water  we  drink,  for  metaphysical 
preciseness  that,  like  the  spiced  wines  of  the  rich,  are  only 
available  for  the  few  ?  We  come,  then,  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  language  of  the  Bible  is  the  best  possible.  Does  that 
language  conflict  with  any  of  the  plain  facts  of  science? 

There  is  yet  to  be  shown  the  first  discrepancy  with  the 
truths  of  science.  Remember,  the  Bible  presents  no  formal 
treatise  upon  astronomy,  geology,  or  chemistry.  It  would 
not,  if  it  did,  adapt  itself  to  the  moral  wants  of  the  world  in 
all  ages ;  it  would  have  been  in  the  highest  degree  premature 
to  enter  into  the  intricacies  of  recent  discoveries,  or  teach 
those  scientific  truths  made  known  within  the  last  three  cen- 
turies.    Moral  truth  comes  before  intellectual  novelty;  the 


SCIENCE  AND   REVELATION.  441 

former  relates  to  salvation,  the  latter  to  refinement  of  mind, 
and  is  as  inferior  in  value  as  the  soul  is  of  more  consequence 
than  the  body.  The  only  thing  necessary  to  show  is  that 
there  is  no  collision  between  the  two,  that  one  is  in  harmony 
with  the  other,  that  no  theory  in  the  Bible  is  propounded 
inconsistent  with  any  legitimate  truth  of  science.  Right 
science  does  not  demand  of  revelation  the  giving  up  of  popu- 
lar language,  nor  does  revelation  demand  of  science  the 
abandonment  of  a  single  truth.  Both  are  in  unison.  Igno- 
rance may  imagine  a  disagreement,  and  make  discrepancies 
out  of  its  doubts,  but  knowledge,  like  the  telescope,  resolves 
mists  into  nebulae,  and  nebulte  into  stars.  Let  the  arrogant 
disbeliever  clear  his  glasses,  or  make  better  ones,  and  he  will 
soon  find  all  mistakes  summed  up  in  his  own  presumption 
and  want  of  knowledge. 

"  Christianity,"  says  President  L.  W.  Green,  "  courts  in- 
vestigation,— she  invites  scrutiny, — she  challenges  discussion, 
— she  throws  down  her  gauntlet  of  defiance  to  every  antago- 
nist,— and  in  every  age  a  thousand  foes  have  leaped  forward 
to  mingle  in  the  assault.  They  come  from  every  quarter, 
and  of  every  character, — each  hoary  superstition,  each  beard- 
less science.  They  wield  every  weapon  of  refined  or  barbar- 
ous warfare,  drawn  from  the  domain  of  history  or  fiction,  of 
imagination  or  of  fact.  They  dig  into  the  bowels  of  the 
earth,  and  hew  the  granite  mountain, — they  explore  the  un- 
fathomed  depths  of  space,  search  the  sepulchers  of  buried 
nations,  decipher  hieroglyphical  inscriptions  in  temples,  pyr- 
amids, and  tombs,  study  the  fabulous  genealogies  and  fabu- 
lous astronomies  of  races  whose  sublime  progenitors,  accord- 
ing to  their  own  account,  must  have  been  cotemporaries  of 
the  saurian  tribes  of  an  earlier  world.  There  is  not  a  false 
religion  upon  earth  that  could  bear  the  test  of  such  a  scru- 
tiny for  a  single  year, — that  would  not  vanish  instantaneously 
before  the  light  of  a  single  science.  The  telescope  and  micro- 
scope alone  would  suffice  to  overthrow  all  the  ancient  reli- 
gions of  Farther  Asia.  That  the  Sacred  Scriptures  should 
have  come  forth  not  only  unharmed,  but  victorious,  from  all 
the  conflicts  of  eighteen  centuries, — that  not  one  of  their  fifty 


442  THE  HARMONY  OF 

writers  has  ever  uttered  or  suggested  an  opinion  contrary 
to  any  of  those  facts  which  the  lapse  of  twenty-three  hundred 
years  has  revealed, — that  each  new  discovery  in  science, 
each  fact  drawn  forth  from  pyramid  or  pillar,  from  sepulcher 
or  coin,  from  mutilated  monument  or  half-defaced  inscrip- 
tion, should  only  serve  to  throw  new  light  upon  their  mean- 
ing and  add  new  evidence  to  their  credibility, — is  perhaps  the 
completest  specimen  wliich  the  whole  range  of  human  learn- 
ing has  yet  afforded  of  the  truth  of  a  theory  established  by 
millions  of  independent  harmonies,  mounting  up,  in  their 
combined  and  multiple  result,  to  billions  of  probabilities  in 
its  favor,  with  absolutely  nothing  to  the  contrary.  The  his- 
tory of  these  objections  against  Christianity  would  he,  in- 
deed, her  proudest  vindication.  Geology  herself,  in  all  her 
cycles,  does  not  present  more  curious  specimens  of  infidel 
objections,  long  buried  and  forgotten  beneath  the  huge 
masses  of  argument  and  learning  with  which  consecrated 
genius  has  overwhelmed  and  preserved  them, — at  once  their 
monument  and  sepulcher.  First  it  was  objected  against  the 
genuineness  of  the  sacred  records,  'that  we  have  not  the 
very  works  of  the  evangelists  and  apostles  themselves.'  Sa- 
cred learning  has'distinctly  proven  that  these  identical  writ- 
ings existed,  and  were  read  in  public  assemblies  throughout 
the  civilized  world,  during  the  first  century, — were  quoted 
by  numerous  writers,  their  immediate  successors,  during  the 
three  succeeding  centuries,  in  such  profusion  that  the  whole 
New  Testament,  in  every  essential  fact  and  doctrine,  might  be 
reconstructed  from  the  quotations  by  these  various  authors ; 
thus  presenting  a  larger  amount  of  testimony  to  this  single 
book,  in  the  course  of  three  centuries,  than  could  be  gathered 
from  all  the  writers  of  all  centuries,  in  behalf  of  the  Greek  and 
Roman  classics,  all  combined.  It  was  then  objected  against 
their  '  uncorrupted  preservation,''  '  that  they  had  been  trans- 
mitted, throug-h  many  centuries,  by  means  of  various  manu- 
scripts written  by  different  hands;  and  that  Mill,  and  other 
critics,  had  discovered  a  corresponding  number  of  various 
readings,  casting  thus  a  serious  doubt  over  the  integrity  and 
authority  of  the  received  texts.'     The  most  profound  investi- 


SCIENCE  AND   REVELATION.  443 

gations  of  modern  times  have  proven  that  all  these  doubtful 
readings  are  really  of  slight  importance  ;  and  even  were  each 
admitted,  or  the  passages  in  which  each  occur  all  stricken 
from  the  Bible,  not  one  essential  doctrine  of  our  faith  would 
be  in  the  slightest  degree  affected ;  and  the  great  fabric  of 
sacred  truth  would  remain  as  complete  in  its  proportions,  its 
symmetry  and  strength,  as  some  vast  cathedral,  from  whose 
strong  foundations  or  lofty  dome  the  hand  of  folly  or  the 
lapse  of  time  had  crumbled  the  minutest  portion  of  the 
cement  which  served  to  unite,  but  did  not  constitute,  the 
massive  marble  of  which  the  building  was  composed.  Driven 
by  successive  defeats  from  the  sure  terra  fir  ma  of  historical 
testimony,  infidelity  took  refuge  amidst  the  hieroglyphics  of 
Egypt  and  the  astronomy  of  the  Hindoos.  Bailly  proved  to 
his  own  satisfaction,  from  the  record  of  eclipses  among  the 
Hindoos,  that  the  existence  of  man  upon  earth  was  many 
thousand  years  earlier  than  the  Mosaic  history  would  allow ; 
and  this  whimsical  vagary  of  a  visionary  man,  though  hooted 
out  of  France  by  the  wit  of  Voltaire  and  the  science  of 
D'Alembert,  was  long  an  established  article  of  faith  among 
the  enlightened  infidels  of  England,  Scotland,  and  America. 
Mathematical  demonstration  and  historical  testimony  have 
since  combined  to  show  that  these  eclipses  were  calculated 
clumsily^  backwards,  for  ages  that  were  past,  and  cannot  be 
dated  so  early  as  the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era. 

"  Some  French  savans  attached  to  Napoleon's  army  during 
the  expedition  into  Egypt  discovered  mysterious  zodiacs. 
Though  unable  to  decipher  the  hieroglyphics  with  certainty, 
one  thing  was  indisputable, — that  the  zodiacs  were  con- 
structed at  the  lowest  seventeen  thousand,  probably  eighteen 
thousand,  years  ago;  and  the  writer  well  remembers  how  his 
boyish  faith  was  shaken  by  the  bold  assertions  and  con- 
temptuous sneers  of  the  Edinburgh  Review  against  all  who 
hesitated  to  receive  their  oracular  utterance,  founded,  as 
they  said,  upon  mathematical  demonstration.  Champollion 
and  his  co-laborers  have  read  the  inscription,  and  find  that 
it  belongs  to  the  age  of  Tiberius  Csesar.  Comparative  anat- 
omy, meantime,  had  become,  through  the  genius  of  Cuvier, 


444  THE  HARMONY  OF 

an  Important  field  of  investigation,  and  presented  many 
striking  examples  of  the  analogical  resemblance  between  the 
structure  of  man  and  that  of  other  animated  beings.  Pro- 
fessor Oken,  descending  one  day  the  Hartz  Mountains,  be- 
held the  beautiful  blanched  skull  of  a  land.  '  I  picked  it  up, 
regarded  it  intently,'  says  he:  '  the  thing  was  done.'  Since 
that  time  the  skull  has  been  regarded  as  a  vertebral  column. 
Rapidly  over  all  Europe  and  throughout  all  scientitic  circles 
spread  the  bold  hypothesis  that  the  skull  is  but  a  develop- 
ment of  the  spine,  part  of  that  other  more  comprehensive 
theory  of  development  which  represents  man — intellectual, 
moral,  immortal  man — as  the  development  of  the  brute, — 
itself  the  development  of  some  monad,  or  mollusk,  which 
has  been  smitten  into  life  by  tlie  action  of  electricity  upon  a 
gelatinous  monad.  This  vertebral  portion  of  a  brutal  theory, 
sprang  from  the  skull  of  a  beast,  long  since  emptied  of  its 
brains,  had  passed  like  a  flood  of  lightning  through  his 
disorganized  brain,  and  he  very  naturally  concluded  that  all 
human  intelligence  is  the  result  of  an  electric  spark  passed 
through  an  unorganized  gelatinous  monad.  It  has  been  well 
remarked  by  an  able  writer  that  the  strongest  argument  in 
favor  of  this  theory  is,  that  any  human  being  should  ever 
have  been  found  willing  to  adopt,  much  more  to  assert  with 
eagerness,  this  high  relationship  to  the  orang-outang  and 
ape.  Congeniality  of  sympathy  may  have  community  of 
orio-in.  'A  fellow-feelino;  makes  us  wondrous  kind.'  Hooted 
from  the  earth,  the  development  h^^pothesis  took  refuge 
amidst  the  distant  nebulae  of  the  farther  heavens.  Driven 
thence  by  Lord  Rosse's  telescope,  it  returned  again  to  the 
earth ;  and  the  last  sad  record  of  its  tragic  fate  assures  us 
that,  hemmed  and  jammed  in  at  last  between  granite  pyra- 
mids and  huge  masses  of  old  red  sandstone,  it  was  shivered 
to  atoms  by  a  blow  from  the  stone  hammer  of  a  Caledonian 
quarrier,  and  of  all  its  prodigious  'creations'  no  'vestiges' 
now  remain." 

When  we  observe  the  countless  worlds  opened  up  to  our 
view  by  the  telescope,  we  perceive  that  the  vast  creation  of 
God  is  as  diversified  in  its  nature  as  it  is  hour  '' 


SCIENCE  AND   REVELATION.  445 

tent ;  we  enjoy  new  and  grand  fields  of  thought,  that  find  no 
limit  in  subjects  and  no  sameness  in  variety.  Happy  is  it  for 
the  cause  of  truth  that  the  Bible,  while  it  touches  cautiously 
upon  themes  of  purely  scientific  interest,  never  infringes 
upon  any  well-attested  fact  of  science.  It  does  indeed  clothe 
its  language  in  a  popular  garb;  but  so  carefully  worded  is 
every  sentence  that  no  assertion  is  made  to  conflict  with  the 
clearly  established  truths  of  nature.  But  more  than  this : 
whatever  revelation  says,  when  subjected  to  a  careful  in- 
vestigation, confirms  science  rather  than  otherwise.  Its  tes- 
timony is  positive,  rather  than  negative;  it  not  only  says 
nothing  against  the  facts  of  science,  but  much  to  strengthen 
them.  Thus,  while  every, other  book  presenting  claims  of  a 
religious  character,  and  in  opposition  in  its  teachings  to  the 
Bible,  stumbles  upon  the  very  threshold  of  the  new  discov- 
eries of  science,  the  Bible,  true  in  every  age,  is  yet  revealed 
with  brighter  luster  in  the  more  brilliant  unfolding  of  the 
truths  of  nature  in  the  present  age. 

It  has  been  thought  by  many  that  if  the  researches  of 
astronomy  or  chemistry  are  not  in  conflict  with  revelation, 
if  nothing  of  validity  can  be  found  to  disprove  the  Mosaic 
account  of  the  unity  of  the  origin  of  man,  the  oneness  of 
his  descent  from  a  single  stock,  yet  at  least  the  dis*coveries 
of  geology,  or  its  teachings,  are  opposed  to  the  Mosaic  ac- 
count of  the  six  days'  creation.  But  let  it  be  remembered, 
the  Bible  does  not  hold  itself  as  the  servant  of  the  particular 
features  of  geology.  It  does  not  undertake  to  father  all  the 
conflicting  views  of  this  new  science;  it  does  not  indorse  all 
that  may  be  called  the  instructions  of  this  science;  and  yet 
it  will  be  seen  that  it  does  not  conflict  with  its  essential  feat- 
ures, but  rather  is  in  harmony  with  the  whole  scope  of  geol- 
ogy, when  viewed  with  a  spirit  of  candor  and  impartiality. 
"What,  then,  are  some  of  the  essential  elements  of  geology  ? 

First.  It  teaches  that  one  epoch  of  ruin  and  creation  is 
succeeded  by  another  of  a  higher  grade  of  vegetable  or  of 
animal  being. 

Second.  It  teaches  great  catastrophes  of  ruin  as  followed 
by  creations  of  vegetable  and  animal  life. 


446  THE  HABMONY  OF 

Third.  It  teaches  that  these   epochs  extended   over  vast 
periods  of  time  and  were  of  indefinite  extent. 

Fourth.  It  teaches  every  epoch  as  introduced  hy  miracle 
rather  than  a  gradual  development  of  natural  law. 

The  question,  then,  is,  Are  these  teachings  wi  reoliUj  opposed 
to  revelation?  To  investigate  this  subject,  in  justice  to  the 
Bible,  is  our  object.  We  do  not  now  discuss  the  question 
whether  geology  is  true  or  whether  the  Bible  is  true.  The 
only  thing  to  be  done  is  to  ascertain  what  is  the  true  inter- 
pretation of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis.  How  are  we  to 
understand  it?  The  Mosaic  narrative  commences  with  tbe 
declaration  that  "In  the  beo-innino^  God  created  the  heaven 
and  the  earth."  These  few  words  briefly  state  the  great  fact 
of  the  original  creation  of  the  material  elements  at  a  time  dis- 
tinctly preceding  the  operations  of  the  first  day.  This  opinion 
is  in  accordance  not  only  with  the  most  natural  interpreta- 
tion, but  it  harmonizes  with  the  sentiments  of  tbe  whole  sci- 
entific world,  and  has  to  support  it  the  authority  of  the  most 
learned  of  the  Christian  church.  It  is  a  sublime  exhibition 
of  the  great  truth  of  the  absolute  creation  of  God,  and  his 
perfect  power  in  bringing  into  existence  every  material 
element.  Thus,  the  first  verse  explicitly  asserts  the  creation 
of  the  universe,  including  the  sidereal  systems;  "and  the 
earth," — especially  alluding  to  our  own  planet  as  the  subse- 
quent scene  of  the  operations  of  the  six  days  about  to  be 
described.  Thus,  in  this  verse  no  information  is  given  of 
events  unconnected  with  the  history  of  man.  Millions  of 
years  may  therefore  have  intervened  before  the  creation  of 
man,  in  wbich  the  sidereal  systems  and  the  earth  may  have 
passed  through  vast  periods  of  time.  No  limit  is  placed  to 
the  ages  which  may  have  elapsed  between  the  hegmniiig  in 
which  God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth,  and  the  evening, 
or  the  commencement  of  the  first  day  of  the  Mosaic  narra- 
tive. To  assert  the  contrary  is  acting  without  any  good 
reason.  Why  may  not  this  be  so?  Does  Moses  assert  the 
contrary?  So  far  from  this,  Moses  expressly  declares,  in 
the  following  verse,  that  "  the  earth  was  without  form,  and 
void,"  evidently  speaking  of  a  chaotic  state  of  the  earth ; 


SCIENCE  AND   REVELATION.  447 

but  this  condition  of  the  earth  must  have  been  subsequent  to 
the  state  of  things  spoken  of  in  the  first  verse,  where  t!ie 
original  creation  of  the  earth,  or  its  elements,  is  described. 
T];iere  is  no  authority  for  making  the  first  verse  and  the  first 
half  of  the  second  verse  cotemporary  with  the  first  day's 
work.  Says  E  B.  Pusey,  Eegius  Professor  of  Hebrew  in 
Oxford:  "The  point,  however,  upon  which  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  appears  to  me  really  to 
turn,  is  whether  the  first  two  verses  are  merely  a  summary 
statement  of  what  is  related  in  detail  in  the  rest  of  the  chap- 
ter, and  a  sort  of  introduction  to  it,  or  whether  they  contain 
an  account  of  an  act  of  creation ;  and  this  last  seems  to  me 
to  be  their  true  interpretation  :  first,  because  there  is  no  other 
account  of  the  creation  of  the  earth;  secondly,  the  second 
verse  describes  the  condition  of  the  earth  when  so  created, 
and  thus  prepares  for  the  account  of  the  work  of  the  six 
days.  But,  if  they  speak  of  an}'  creation,  it  appears  to  me 
that  this  creation  '  in  the  beginning'  was  previous  to  the  six 
days,  because,  as  you  will  observe,  the  creation  of  each  day 
is  preceded  by  the  declaration  that  God  said,  or  willed,  that 
such  things  shall  be  ('  and  God  said') ;  and  therefore  the  very 
form  of  the  narrative  seems  to  imply  that  the  creation  of  the 
first  day  began  when  these  words  are  first  used,  i.e.  with  the 
creation  of  light,  in  verse  third.  The  time,  then,  of  the  crea- 
tion in  verse  first  appears  not  to  be  defined  ;  we  are  tokl  only 
what  alone  we  are  concerned  with, — that  all  things  were 
made  by  God.  Nor  is  this  any  new  opinion.  Many  of  the 
fathers  supposed  the  first  two  verses  of  Genesis  to  contain  an 
account  of  a  distinct  and  prior  act  of  creation  ;  some,  as 
Augustine,  Theodoret,  and  others,  that  of  the  creation  of 
matter ;  others,  that  of  the  elements ;  others,  again  (and  they 
are  the  most  numerous),  imagine  that  not  these  visible  heav- 
ens, but  what  they  think  to  be  called  elsewhere  'the  highest 
heavens,'  '  the  heaven  of  heavens,'  are  here  spoken  of.  Our 
visible  heavens  being  related  to  have  been  created  on  the 
second  day,  Petovius  himself  regards  the  light  as  the  only 
act  of  creation  of  the  first  day  ('  de  opere  primse  diei,  i.e. 
luce');  considering  the  first  two  verses  as  a  summary  of  the 


448  THE  HARMONY  OF 

account  of  creation  which  was  about  to  follow,  and  a  general 
cTeclaration  that  all  things  were  made  by  God." 

Professor  Pusey  also  remarks  that  the  words  "Let  there  be 
light"  "  by  no  means  necessarily  imply,  any  more  than  the 
English  words  by  which  thej-  are  transhited,  that  light  had 
never  existed  before.  They  may  speak  only  of  the  substitu- 
tion of  light  for  darkness  upon  the  surface  of  this  our  planet. 
Whether  light  had  existed  before  in  other  parts  of  God's 
creation,  or  had  existed  upon  this  earth  before  the  darkness 
described  in  verse  second,  is  foreign  to  the  purpose  of  the 
narrative." 

Dr.  Buckland,  in  his  Bridgewater  Treatise,  remarks,  con- 
cernino;  the  earth  mentioned  in  the  first  verse  of  Genesis: 
"  We  have  further  mention  of  this  ancient  earth  and  ancient 
sea  in  the  ninth  verse,  in  which  the  waters  are  commanded 
to  be  gathered  together  into  one  place,  and  the  dry  land  to 
appear;  this  dry  land  being  the  same  earth  whose  material 
creation  had  been  announced  in  the  first  verse,  and  whose 
temporary  submersion  and  temporary  darkness  are  described 
in  the  second  verse.  The  ap)pearance  of  the  land  and  the 
gathering  together  of  the  waters  are  the  only  facts  afiirmed  re- 
specting them  in  the  ninth  verse;  but  neither  land  nor  water 
is  said  to  have  been  created  on  tlie  third  day.  A  similar  in- 
terpretation may  be  given  of  the  fourteenth  and  four  suc- 
ceeding verses.  What  is  herein  stated  of  the  celestial 
luminaries  seems  to  be  spoken  soleh'  with  reference  to  our 
planet,  and  more  especially  to  the  human  race  then  about  to 
be  placed  upon  it.  We  are  not  told  that  the  substance  of  the 
sun  and  moon  were  first  called  into  existence  upon  the  fourth 
day;  the  text  may  equally  imply  that  these  bodies  were  then 
prepared,  and  appointed  to  certain  high  ofiices  of  high  im- 
portance to  mankind:  to  give  'light  upon  the  earth,  and 
to  rule  over  the  day  and  over  the  night ;'  to  be  'for  signs, 
and  for  seasons,  and  for  days,  and  years.'  The  fact  of  their 
creation  had  been  stated  before,  in  the  first  verse.  The  stars 
also  are  mentioned  in  these  words  only  (Gen.  i.  16),  almost 
parenthetically,  as  if  for  the  sole  purpose  of  announcing  that 
they  also  were  made  by  the  same  power  as  those  luminaries 


SCIEXCE  ASD   REVELATIOX.  449 

whicli  are  more  important  to  us.  This  very  slight  notice  of 
the  countless  hosts  of  the  celestial  bodies,  all  of  which  are 
probably  suns,  the  centers  of  other  planetary  systems,  while 
our  little  satellite,  the  moon,  is  mentioned  as  next  in  impor- 
tance to  the  sun,  shows  clearly  that  astronomical  phenomena 
are  here  spoken  of  only  according  to  their  relative  impor- 
tance to  our  earth  and  to  mankind,  and  without  any  regard 
to  their  real  importance  in  the  boundless  universe.  It  seems 
impossible  to  include  the  fixed  stars  among  those  bodies 
which  are  said  (Gen.  i.  17)  to  have  been  set  in  the  firmament 
of  the  heavens  to  give  light  upon  the  earth ;  since,  without 
the  aid  of  telescopes,  by  far  the  greater  number  of  them  are 
invisible.  The  same  principle  seems  to  pervade  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  creation  which  concerns  our  planet.  The  creation 
of  its  component  matter  having  been  announced  in  the  first 
verse,  the  phenomena  of  geology,  like  those  of  astronomy, 
are  passed  over  in  silence,  and  the  narrative  proceeds  at  once 
to  details  of  the  actual  creation  which  have  more  immediate 
reference  to  man.  The  interpretation  here  proposed  seems, 
moreover,  to  solve  the  difliculty  which  would  otherwise 
attend  the  statement  of  the  appearance  of  light  upon  the 
first  day,  while  the  sun  and  moon  and  stars  are  not  made 
to  appear  until  the  fourth.  If  we  suppose  all  the  heavenly 
bodies  and  the  earth  to  have  been  created  at  the  indefinitely 
distant  time  designated  by  the  word  'beginning,'  and  that  the 
darkness  described  on  the  evening  of  the  first  day  was  a  tem- 
porary darkness  produced  by  the  accumulation  of  dense 
vapors  'upon  the  face  of  the  deep,'  an  incipient  dispersion 
of  these  vapors  may  have  readmitted  light  to  the  earth  upon 
the  first  day,  while  the  exciting  cause  of  light  was  still  ob- 
scured ;  and  the  farther  purification  of  the  atmosphere  upon 
the  fourth  day  may  have  caused  the  sun  and  moon  and  stars 
to  reappear  in  the  firmament  of  heaven,  to  assume  their  new 
relations  to  the  newly  modified  earth  and  to  the  human  race. 
TVe  have  evidence  of  the  presence  of  light  during  long  and 
distant  periods  of  time,  in  which  the  many  extinct  fossil 
forms  of  animal  life  succeeded  one  another  upon  the  early 
surface  of  the  globe.     This  evidence  consists  in  the  petrified 

29 


450  THE  HARMONY  OF 

remains  of  eyes  of  animals  found  in  geological  formations 
of  various  ages." 

"  It  appears  higbly  probable,  from  recent  discoveries,  tbat 
ligbt  is  not  a  material  substance,  but- only  an  effect  of  undula- 
tions of  ether  ;  that  this  infinitely  subtle  and  elastic  ether  per- 
vades all  space,  and  even  the  interior  of  all  bodies  :  so  long  as 
it  remains  at  rest,  there  is  total  darkness;  when  it  is  put  in  a 
peculiar  state  of  vibration,  the  sensation  of  light  is  produced: 
this  vibration  may  be  excited  by  various  causes;  e.g.  by  the 
sun,  by  the  stars,  by  electricity,  combustion,  etc.  If,  then, 
Hght  be  not  a  substance,  but  only  a  series  of  vibrations  of 
ether,  i.e.  an  effect  produced  on  a  subtle  fluid  by  the  excite- 
ment of  one  or  many  extraneous  causes,  it  can  be  hardly  said 
to  have  been  created,  though  it  may  be  literally  said  to  be 
called  into  action." 

"  Lastly,  in  the  reference  made  in  the  fourth  command- 
ment (Exod.  XX.  11)  to  the  six  days  of  the  Mosaic  creation, 
the  word  asali,  '  made,'  is  the  same  which  is  used  in  Gen.  i.  7, 
and  which  has  been  shown  to  be  less  strong  and  less  compre- 
hensive than  hora,  'created;'  and,  as  it  by  no  means  necessa- 
rily implies  creation  out  of  nothing,  it  may  be  here  employed 
to  express  a  new  arrangement  of  materials  that  existed  be- 
fore. After  all,  it  should  be  recollected  that  the  question  is 
not  respecting  the  correctness  of  the  Mosaic  narrative,  but  of 
our  interpretation  of  it ;  and  still  further,  it  should  be  borne 
in  mind  that  the  object  of  this  account  was  not  to  state  in 
what  manner,  but  by  whom,  the  w^orld  was  made." 

"JSTeither  the  first  verse,  nor  the  first  half  of  the  second," 
says  Chalmers,  "  forms  any  part  of  the  narrative  of  the  first 
day's  operations, — the  whole  forming  a  preparatory  sentence, 
disclosing  to  us  the  initial  act  of  creation  at  some  remote  and 
undefined  period,  and  the  chaotic  state  of  the  world  at  the 
commencement  of  those  successive  acts  of  creative  power  by 
which,  out  of  rude  and  undigested  materials,  the  present  har- 
mony of  nature  was  ushered  into  being.  Between  the  initial 
act  and  the  details  of  Genesis,  the  world,  for  aught  w^e  know, 
might  have  been  the  theater  of  many  revolutions,  the  traces 
of  which  geology  may  still  investigate." 


SCIENCE  AND   BEVELATION.  451 

Our  object,  in  these  extracts  from  men  whose  opinion  is 
deserving  of  high  consideration,  is  simply  to  show  that  there 
is  no  inconsistency  between  revelation  and  the  essential  feat- 
ures of  geological  science.  It  is  enough  if  it  is  proved  that 
the  statements  of  the  one  do  not,  in  respect  to  the  antiquity 
of  this  earth,  conflict  with  the  statements  of  the  other.  It  is 
all-sufficient  if  the  Mosaic  narrative  is  found,  in  its  essential 
features,  to  correspond  with  the  records  of  natural  science. 
The  only  apparent  difficulty  presented  is  in  the  light  of  the 
first  day,  and  the  appearance  of  the  sun  and  moon  the  fourth 
day  ;■  but  this  difficulty  vanishes  upon  a  careful  considera- 
tion of  the  true  import  of  the  Mosaic  narrative.  Recent  in- 
vestigations in  astronomy  have  shown  the  intimate  analogy 
of  our  sun  with  the  fixed  stars.  It  has  been  proved  that  the 
stars  are  suns,  like  our  own,  and  that  variability,  rather  than 
uniformity,  is  the  condition  of  their  light :  thus,  at  different 
periods  of  the  world,  some  stars  have,  even  within  the  short 
record  of  man,  been  found  to  intermit  in  their  light,  to  blaze 
forth  with  unwonted  brilliancy,  and  then  suddenly  die  away 
altogether,  or  vastly  decrease  in  the  light  given. 

Says  l^ichol.  Professor  of  Astronomy  in  Glasgow  Univer- 
sity: "The  question  cannot  fail  to  suggest  itself  here, 
^whether  the  sun  is  now  as  he  ever  wnll  be,  or  only  in  one  state 
or  epoch  of  his  efficiency,  as  the  radiant  source  of  light  and 
heat.'  The  new  star  in  Cassiopeia,  seen  by  Tycho,  for  in- 
stance, indicated  some  great  change  in  the  light  and  heat 
of  an  orb.  That  star  never  moved  from  its  place  ;  and  during 
its  course  from  extreme  brilliancy  to  apparent  extinction,  the 
color  of  its  light  altered,  passing  through  the  hues  of  a  dying 
conflagration.'' 

Here  have  we  facts  unquestionable  of  astronomy,  showing 
that  suns  in  their  light  at  different  epochs  may  and  do  pass 
through  an  amazing  change.  Some  are  relighted  and  some 
extinguished.  Thus,  the  sun  is  a  light-hearer ;  and  why  may  it 
not  at  the  great  epoch  of  the  six  days'  creation,  during  the  pe- 
riod of  chaos  and  darkness,  have  been  obscured  or  previously 
been  in  a  mighty  transition  from  light  to  darkness  ?  Why 
may  not  the  chaotic  state  of  the  preadamite  earth  have  been 


452  THE  HABMONY  OF 

owing  to  one  of  those  vast  catastrophes  that  suddenly,  through 
the  loss  of  the  heat  and  light  of  the  sun,  have  thrown  all 
things  into  darkness  and  chaotic  confusion?  Why  should  our 
sun  prove  an  exception  to  other  suns  ?  If  this  hypothesis 
cannot  be  proved,  it  may  be  safely  said  that  it  cannot  be  dis- 
proved. There  is  every  analogy  in  science  to  favor  it,  and 
nothing  against  it.  Thus,  the  more  we  study  the  true  import 
of  revelation  the  more  clearly  do  we  discover  the  real  har- 
mony existing  between  it  and  science.  Wliile  the  Bible  does 
not  profess  to  give  a  treatise  upon  the  sciences,  there  yet  is 
nothing  to  conflict  wnth  them  ;  and  where  it  does  speak  out, 
all  its  allusions  are  such  as  make  known  its  origin  from  God. 
"  There  is,  then,"  says  the  eloquent  Gaussen,  "  no  physical 
error  in  the  Scriptures;  and  this  great  fact  becomes  always 
more  admirable  in  proportion  as  it  is  more  clearly  contem- 
plated. N'ever  will  3-ou  find  a  single  sentence  in  opposition 
to  the  just  notions  which  science  has  imparted  to  us  con- 
cerning the  form  of  our  glol)e,  its  magnitude  and  its  geology, 
— upon  the  void  and  upon  space, — upon  the  planets  and  their 
masses,  their  courses,  their  dimensions,  or  their  influences, 
— upon  the  suns  wdiich  people  the  depths  of  space,  upon  their 
number,  their  nature,  their  immensity.  You  shall  not  find 
one  of  the  authors  of  the  Bible  who  has,  in  speaking  of  the 
visible  world,  let  fall  from  his  pen  one  only  of  those  sentences 
which  in  other  books  contradict  the  reality  of  fixcts ;  none 
who  make  the  heavens  a  firmament,  as  do  the  Seventy,  St.  Je- 
rome, and  all  the  fathers  of  the  church ;  none  who  make  the 
world,  as  Plato  did,  an  intelligent  animal;  none  who  reduce 
everything  below  to  the  four  elements  of  the  ancients ;  not 
one  who  has  spoken  of  the  mountains  as  Mohammed  did,  of 
the  cosmogony  as  BufFon,  of  the  antipodes  as  Lucretius,  as 
Plutarch,  as  Pliny,  as  Lactantius,  as  St.  Augustine,  as  the 
Pope  Zachara.  When  the  Scriptures  speak  of  the  form  of 
the  earth,  they  make  it  a  globe  ;  when  they  speak  of  the  posi- 
tion of  this  globe  in  the  bosom  of  the  universe,  they  suspend 
it  iqmn  nothing.  When  they  speak  of  its  age,  not  only  do 
they  put  its  creation,  as  well  as  that  of  the  heavens,  in  the 
'  beginning,' — that  is,  before  the  ages  which  they  cannot  or 


SCIENCE  AND   REVELATION.  453 

will  not  number, — but  they  are  also  careful  to  place  it  before 
the  breaking  up  of  chaos  and  the  creation  of  man,  the  crea- 
tion of  angels,  of  archangels,  of  principalities  and  powers, 
their  trial,  the  fall  of  some  and  their  ruin,  the  perseverance 
of  others  and  their  glory.  When  they  speak  of  the  heavens, 
they  employ  to  designate  and  define  them  the  most  philo- 
sophic and  the  most  eloquent  expression  wdiicli  the  Greeks 
in  the  Septuagint  translation,  the  Latin  Vulgate,  and  all  the 
Christian  fathers  in  their  discourses,  have  pretended  to  im- 
prove, and  which  they  have  distorted  because  it  seemed  to 
them  opposed  to  the  science  of  their  day.  The  heavens  in  the 
Bible  are  '  the  expanse,'  they  are  the  vacant  space,  or  ether, 
or  immensity,  and  not  the  '  firmamentum'  of  Jerome,  nor 
the  '  a-cspicofm  of  the  Alexandrian  interpreters,  nor  the  eighth 
heaven,  firm.,  solid,  crystalline,  and  incorruptible,  of  Aristotle 
and  of  all  the  ancients;  and  although  the  Hebrew  term,  so  re- 
markable, recurs  seventeen  times  in  the  Old  Testament,  and 
the  Seventy  have  rendered  it  seventeen  times  by  '  areijiojiKx 
(firmament),  never  have  the  Scriptures  in  the  ITew  Testament 
used  this  expression  of  the  Greek  interpreters  in  this  sense. 
AVhen  they  speak  of  the  air,  the  gravity  of  lohich  was 
unknown  before  Galileo,  they  tell  us  that  at  the  creation 
'  God  gave  to  the  air  its  weight.'  (Job,  xxvii.  5.)  When  they 
speak  of  the  light,  they  present  it  to  us  as  an  element  inde- 
pendent of  the  sun,  and  as  anterior  by  three  epochs  to  the 
period  in  which  that  luminary  was  formed.  When  they 
speak  of  the  interior  state  of  our  globe,  they  teach  us  that 
while  its  surface  gives  us  bread, '  beneath  it  is  on  fire.'  (Job,  xxvii. 
5.)  When  they  speak  of  the  mountains,  they  distinguish 
them  as  primary  and  secondary;  they  represent  them  as  being 
born;  they  make  them  rise;  they  abase  the  valleys  ;  they  speak 
as  a  geological  poet  of  our  day  would  do:  '  The  mountains 
were  lifted  up  (elevated),  0  Lord ;  the  valleys  were  abased 
(Hebrew,  "descended")  in  the  place  which  thou  hadst  as- 
signed them.'  " 

Thus  do  science  and  revelation  walk  together  in  harmony, 
both  pointing  to  the  same  glorious  power  and  wisdom,  reveal- 
ing the  same  infinite  Author,  and  urging  to  Christian  duty 
with  the  tokens  of  an  ever-present  God. 


CHAPTER    XVI. 

THE    UNITY    OF    THE    HUMAN    RACE. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Bible  upon  the  origin  of  the  human 
fomily  is,  that  the  whole  race  of  man  proceeded  from  Adam 
and  Eve ;  that  their  iirst  home  was  the  garden  of  Eden  ;  their 
condition  one  of  perfect  innocence,  and  as  they  came  from 
the  hands  of  God  they  had  enstamped  upon  them  the  image 
of  their  Maker,  and  were  alike  sinless  and  free  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  their  natural  powers.  As  such,  of  their  own  free- 
dom, as  responsible  moral  agents,  they  fell  from  their  high 
estate,  and  thus  brought  upon  themselves  the  punishment 
of  sin. 

Is  there  anything  in  the  condition  of  the  human  family  to 
disprove  this  statement?  anything  to  show  the  Mosaic  re- 
cord false  ?  It  will  be  our  design  to  reply  to  this  question. 
If  history,  so  far  as  it  can  be  relied  upon,  confirms  the  record 
of  Moses,  if  the  researches  of  science  can  show  nothing  in  the 
diversity  of  the  human  race  to  disprove  this  statement,  then 
have  we  a  high  proof  of  the  gennineness  of  the  Mosaic  his- 
tory, and  additional  argument  to  confirm  the  inspiration  of 
the  Bible. 

Consider,  in  the  first  place,  that  all  the  earliest  accounts 
of  the  origin  of  man  point  to  a  first  period  of  innocence  and 
happiness.  The  golden  age  of  the  poets  of  antiquit}^  pointed 
to  such  a  period.  The  traditions  of  the  earliest  state  of  man  all 
had  reference  to  a  condition  different  from  his  present  state. 
As  the  majestic  columns  of  some  ancient  temple,  that  lie 
scattered  upon  the  ground,  point  out  the  grandeur  of  its 
former  state,  so,  also,  there  is  that  in  human  nature  that 
seems  to  intimate  that  man  is  but  a  wreck  of  what  he 
once  was,  and  that  he  only  carries  about  with  him  the  rem- 
nants of  his  original  glory.  Thus,  as  we  study  the  tra- 
(454) 


THE   UNITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  RACE.  455 

ditions  of  history  or  look  to  man  in  his  present  condition, 
there  is  nothing  to  disprove  the  Mosaic  record,  but  rather 
much  to  confirm  it.  Among  the  many  events  of  history,  few 
can  surpass  in  interest  the  occasion  when  Paul  for  the  first 
time  addressed  the  learned  Athenians.  Ascending  the  steps 
of  the  Areopagus,  there  was  presented  to  his  eye  a  scene  of 
nature  unequaled  in  majesty  and  loveliness.  There  lay  be- 
hind him  the  JEgean  Sea,  Upon  Mars  Hill  stood  the  famed 
temple  of  ancient  idolatry.  Before  him  were  gathered  the 
inquisitive,  the  imaginative,  the  pleasure-loving  Athenians. 
Among  them  were  the  philosophers,  and  such  as  delighted 
in  the  arts  and  those  works  of  beauty  for  which  the  land  of 
Greece  was  renowned.  But  what  was  the  mission  of  Paul? 
It  was  to  teach  doctrines,  to  advance  opinions,  opposed  to  all 
their  previous  habits  of  thought,  their  ancient  customs,  their 
religion,  and  their  habitual  life.  It  was  to  show  their  whole 
system  of  idol-worship  wrong,  their  whole  theology  based 
upon  error.  It  was  to  reveal  the  one  infinite  God,  the  one 
perfect  atonement  of  Christ,  and  that  only  system  of  redemp- 
tion by  .which  man  can  be  saved.  It  was  to  make  known  the 
unity  of  the  human  family  as  descended  from  one  common 
parentage  and  having  one  common  blood.  It  was  to  make 
clear  the  great  truth  that  man  was  involved  in  the  ruin  of  the 
same  fall,  and  had  the  same  duties  to  perform,  and  the  same 
immortality  of  blessedness  to  secure,  and  greatness  of  misery 
to  avoid.  But  the  unity  of  the  human  race,  as  descended 
from  Adam  and  Eve,  was  an  idea  foreign  to  the  proud  Athe- 
nians. They  gloried  in  an  origin  distinct  from  that  of  other 
nations.  They  regarded  themselves  as  auroy^Oo'^eq,  sprung  from 
the  sacred  soil  of  Attica,  underived,  and  independent  of 
other  fimiilies  of  mankind.  Paul  considered  it  essential  to 
Christianity  to  show  that  the  unity  of  the  divine  nature  in-, 
volvedthe  unity  of  the  human,  and  that  the  oneness  of  the 
race  involved  the  oneness  of  the  source  from  which  the  race 
sprang.  "  God,  that  made  the  world  and  all  things  therein, 
hath  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men  for  to  dwell  on'all 
the  face  of  the  earth  ;  and  hath  determined  the  times  before 
appointed,  and  the  bounds  of  their  habitation." 


456  THE   UNITY  OF 

Thus  the  unity  of  the  human  race  was  by  Paul  regarded 
as  essential  to  the  system  of  redemption  by  Christ,  since  that 
redemption  was  based  upon  the  idea  of  one  common  ex- 
posure to  ruin,  through  the  fall  of  one  common  parentage : 
this  is  seen  in  the  parallel  run  at  length  between  the  fall  of  the 
race  in  Adam,  and  its  redemption  in  Christ.  Thus,  the  apos- 
tle, in  Romans,  declares,  "By  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
world,  and  death  by  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men." 
"As  by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were  made  sinners, 
so  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be  made  righteous." 
"  For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive."  "  The  first  man  Adam  was  made  a  living 
soul,  the  last  Adam  was  made  a  quickening  spirit."  Thus, 
in  the  universal  headship  of  the  one  we  see  the  counterpart 
in  the  universal  headship  of  the  other.  We  do  not  attempt 
to  define  the  mysterious  relation  Adam  sustained  to  the 
human  family.  It  is  not  our  object  to  illustrate  in  its  essen- 
tial elements  the  oneness  of  the  human  race  through  a 
common  parentage.  We  only  state  that  the  Scripture  lan- 
guage unequivocally  asserts  that  oneness.  It  declares  the  fact 
of  a  descent  from  Adam,  the  first  man,  of  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth ;  it  asserts  that  as  sin  was  introduced  by  the  first 
man,  so  was  redemption  by  the  second  man,  Christ ;  it  com- 
pares the  two  together,  contrasts  the  diflerence  of  each,  and 
most  plainly  asserts  but  one  common  father  of  the  whole 
human  race.  Now,  this  truth  stands  upon  the  same  ground 
as  do  all  the  revealed  truths  of  the  Bible.  It  is  most  inti- 
mately linked  with  the  inspiration  of  the  word  of  God.  It  is 
asserted  not  only  in  Genesis,  but  implied  in  every  book  of 
the  Bible.  Not  a  single  intimation  is  there  to  the  contrary  in 
any  book  of  the  Bible.  Thus  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures  must  be  shown  to  be  erroneous,  before  the  fact  of 
a  common  origin  can  be  disproved,  even  if  its  general  inspi- 
ration is  admitted;  because  the  unity  of  the  human  race  is 
one  great  link  in  the  chain  to  show  the  fullest  inspiration  of 
the  Bible. 

If,  then,  history  and  the  Bible  point  to  the  central  region 
of  Asia  as  the  cradle  of  the  human  race, — if  early  tradition 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  457 

in  all  the  works  of  aucieut  philosophers  and  poets  speak  of  a 
golden  age  of  innocence,  and  correspond  in  their  essential 
features  with  the  account  of  inspiration, — must  not  the  most 
demonstrative,  the  most  irresistible  evidence  be  presented  to 
lead  us  to  doubt  a  fact  admitted  so  universally  in  all  ages  of 
the  world  ? 

Is  it  enough  to  raise  objections  only  from  the  diversity  in 
the  human  family  ?  Are  we  to  throw  every  evidence  from 
history  and  revelation  away,  because  of  the  cavils  of  modern 
skepticism  upon  this  subject?  Who  knows  not  how  easy  it 
is  to  raise  objections  upon  all  subjects?  Who  is  ignorant 
how  common  doubt  is  ?  If  some  students  of  science  please 
to  question  the  parentage  of  man  from  Adam,  is  it  not  equally 
evident  how  unanimous  has  been  the  opinion  of  the  wisest 
and  the  best  in  every  age  in  confirmation  of  the  oneness  of 
the  family  of  man  as  coming  from  a  single  stock  ?  But, 
leaving  the  ground  of  inspiration,  let  us  see  if  upon  the 
ground  alone  of  science  the  descent  of  the  human  family 
from  one  stock  can  be  disproved. 

We  will  first  see  if  there  are  greater  varieties  in  the  human 
species  than  among  the  different  species  of  animals ;  if  so,  are 
those  varieties  so  peculiar  and  distinct  as  to  authorize  the 
setting  aside  of  the  voice  of  history  and  revelation  ?  Now,  it 
can  be  most  clearly  proved  that  the  varieties  of  animals  of 
the  lower  species  are  as  great  and  even  far  greater  than  exist 
in  the  human  species;  and  that  also  among  existing  varieties 
the  distinction  is  not  so  marked  among  men  as  among  quad- 
rupeds. Thus  we  must  in  consistency  believe  that  the  human 
species  had  a  common  parentage,  even  as  all  other  distinct 
species  of  animals,  if  we  repudiate  the  idea  of  a  distinct 
parentage  for  every  variety  of  animals.  We  cannot  suppose 
that  the  most  marked  peculiarities  of  the  human  species 
had  each  a  distinct  creation,  any  more  than  the  most  marked 
peculiarities  of  the  dog  race  or  the  cat  race.  But  this  is 
not  all.  Varieties  of  form,  color,  size,  strength,  and  intel- 
ligence among  the  dififerent  species  of  animals  are  so 
blended  gether  in  each  that  it  is  impossible  to  say  where 
the   creation    of  these   distinct   species,    or   varieties,  com- 


458  THE    UNITY  OF. 

menced.  One  man  may  make  out  two,  another  five,  and 
another  ten  distinct  creations  for  each  prominent  variety  in 
each  species;  and  yet  some  other  student,  progressing  farther 
in  science,  may  even  double  the  number.  Where  is  this  sub- 
division of  creation  among  the  varieties  of  species  to  end  ?  So 
of  the  human  species  :  upon  the  ground  of  a  common  origin 
from  one  stock,  we  can  find  no  difliculty  with  the  existing 
varieties  of  the  race  of  man  ;  but,  if  we  must  go  to  a  different 
creation  for  each  of  the  most  prominent  varieties,  we  know  not 
where  to  stop.  The  varieties  of  form,  color,  strength,  intel- 
ligence, are  so  infinite  in  their  minute  shades,  these  varieties 
so  blend  with  one  another,  that  the  most  difiicult  of  tasks  is 
to  separate  each  prominent  varietj'.  IIow,  upon  the  score  of 
ease  in  classifying  the  varieties  of  the  human  family,  are  we 
bettered  when  we  resort  to  the  theory  of  five  or  six  different 
origins?  We  must,  in  consistency,  carry  out  the  same  prin- 
ciple in  classifying  the  varieties  of  each  species  of  animals. 
What  are  we  to  do  in  determining  how  few  or  how  many  are 
the  diverse  creations  in  each  species  ?  Thus  we  see  at  once 
how  inextricable  is  the  confusion  that  arises  from  atternpting 
to  make  out  so  many  different  origins  in  the  human  family'. 
What  prevents  the  same  principle  of  analogy  from  holding 
equally  good  in  the  existing  varieties  of  animals?  ^ow,  in  the 
strict  nomenclature  of  science,  a  species  is  a  class  of  animals 
having  a  descent  from  one  stock:  if,  then,  we  ignore  the  idea 
of  the  human  race  coming  from  one  stock,  why,  when  greater 
varieties  can  be  shown  in  the  species  of  animals,  are  we  to 
single  out  the  human  race  as  an  exception  ?  Why  are  we 
to  resort  to  a  kind  of  argument  with  the  race  of  man  that 
we  do  not  follow  out  with  the  race  of  dogs,  cats,  lions,  or 
horses? 

There  are  two  great  laws  in  respect  to  species.  One  is 
that  each  species,  within  certain  limits,  is  susceptible  of  in- 
finite variety ;  another  law  is,  that  beyond  those  limits  each 
species  remains  permanent,  with  rigid  adherence  to  an  unde- 
viating  law  of  development.  Thus,  we  may  see  a  vast  variety 
of  dogs,  but  no  dog  ever  emerges  into  the  sheep,  no  sheep 
ever  puts  on  the  features  of  the  cat.     Nature  has  interposed 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  459 

an  impassable  barrier  to  each  species  of  animals,  so  that 
amalgamation  is  impossible;  and  thus  there  can  be  no  inter- 
change with  each  species.  Thus,  by  the  law  of  variety,  we 
see  a  most  happy  adaptation  to  the  differences  of  climate  and 
country ;  while,  by  the  law  of  development  of  species,  there 
are  no  monstrosities  in  nature  and  no  compounding  of 
orio'inal  differences.  By  the  one  law  we  have  a  most  usefr.l 
facility  of  being  conformed  to  the  varied  climates  and 
countries  of  the  earth,  while  by  the  other  law  is  preserved 
the  harmony  of  animal  existence.  "With  the  first  law  domes- 
ticity and  migration  are  possible,  and  with  the  latter  the 
peculiarities  of  each  species  are  permanently  retained.  Both 
are  indispensable.  We  see  that  nature  has  implanted  an 
invincible  repugnance  to  union  among  the  different  species, 
and  given  to  each  species  an  undeviating  character  of  one- 
ness. The  law  of  organic  life  is  that  each  species  shall  pro- 
pagate its  kind,  and  no  other;  and  whatever  apparent  ex- 
ceptions may  exist,  we  know  the  limit  of  development  is 
exceedingly  contracted,  and  that,  as  in  the  case  of  mules  and 
hybrid  plants  and  animals,  there  is  wanting  the  power  of 
reproduction.  Consequently,  the  race  becomes  extinct,  and 
the  hybrid  is  incapable  of  establishing  a  new  species.  The 
question,  then,  to  decide  is,  Are  there  greater  varieties 
among  the  human  species  than  among  the  species  of  quad- 
rupeds ?  If  the  varieties  of  animals  in  each  species  are  as 
2:reat,  or  greater  than  in  the  human  race,  then,  if  we  admit 
that  species  means  the  descent  from  one  stock,  we  cannot 
with  any  shadow  of  reason  doubt  that  the  human  race 
came  from  one  stock.  Varieties  of  species  are  formed  from 
an  endless  diversity  of  circumstances.  ISoi  only  are  cli- 
mate, domestication,  country,  the  intermingling  with  dif- 
ferent varieties  of  the  same  species,  to  be  considered,  but 
occasional  accidents  without  any  known  cause.  Thus, 
ill  1791,  upon  the  farm  of  Seth  Wright,  of  Massachusetts, 
one  ewe  gave  birth  to  a  male  lamb  which  had  a  longer  body 
and  shorter  legs  than  the  rest  of  the  breed,  with  the  fore-legs 
crooked.  This  form  making  it  impossible  for  the  sheep  to 
leap  fences,  it  was   resolved   to   perpetuate   this  accidental 


460  THE    UNITY  OF 

variety,  which  was  accordingly  done.  Thus,  also,  a  race  of 
swiiie  with  solid  hoofs  arose  in  Hungary  in  the  same  way  ; 
and  recently,  without  any  assignable  cause,  the  same  singular 
variety  has  made  its  appearance  along  the  banks  of  the  Red 
River,  in  our  own  country.  The  Spaniards,  when  they  dis- 
covered this  country,  found  none  of  the  domestic  animals 
existing  here  which  were  used  in  Europe.  They  were 
accordingly  introduced,  and,  escaping,  strayed  from  their 
owners  and  ran  wild  in  the  forest,  and  have  thus  continued 
for  several  centuries.  The  result  is,  the  obliteration  of  the 
characteristics  of  the  domesticated  animals,  and  a  reappear- 
ance of  some  of  the  typal  marks  of  the  wild  state,  and  a 
generation  of  new  and  striking  characteristics,  in  accommo- 
dation to  their  new  circumstances. 

"  The  wild  hog  of  our  forests,"  says  T.  V.  Moore,  "  bears 
a  striking  likeness  to  the  wild  boar  of  the  Old  World. 
The  hog  of  the  high  mountains  of  Parumus  resembles  the 
wild  boar  of  France.  Instead  of  being  covered  with  bristles, 
however,  as  the  domestic  breed  from  which  they  sprang, 
they  have  a  thick  fur,  often  crisp,  and  sometimes  an  under- 
coat of  wool.  Instead  of  being  generally  white  or  spotted, 
they  are  uniformly  black,  except  in  some  warmer  regions, 
where  they  are  red,  like  the  young  peccary.  The  anatomical 
structure  has  changed,  adapting  itself  to  the  new  habits  of 
the  animal,  in  an  elongation  of  the  snout,  a  vaulting  of  the 
forehead,  a  lengthening  of  the  hind  legs  ;  and,  in  the  case  of 
those  left  on  the  island  of  Cubagua,  a  monstrous  elongation 
of  the  toes  to  half  a  span.  The  ox  has  undergone  the  same 
changes.  In  some  of  the  provinces  of  South  America  a 
variety  has  been  produced  called  '  prelones,'  having  a  very 
rare  and  fine  fur.  In  other  provinces  a  variety  is  produced 
with  an  entirely  naked  skin,  like  the  dog  of  Mexico  or  of 
Guinea.  In  Columbia,  owing  to  the  immense  size  of  farms 
and  other  causes,  the  practice  of  milking  was  laid  aside  ;  and 
the  result  has  been  that  the  secretion  of  milk  in  the  cows, 
like  the  same  function  in  other  animals  of  this  class,  is  only 
an  occasional  phenomenon,  and  confined  strictly  to  the  period 
of  suckling  the  calf     As  soon  as  the  calf  is  removed,  the 


THE  HUMAN  BACE.  461 

milk  ceases  to  flow,  as  in  the  case  of  other  mammals.  The 
same  changes  have  taken  place  in  other  animals.  The  Avilcl 
dog  of  the  Pampas  never  barks,  as  the  domestic  animal 
does,  but  howls  like  the  wolf;  while  the  wild  cat  has,  in  like 
manner,  lost  the  habit  of  caterwanling.  The  wild  horse  of 
the  higher  plains  of  South  America  becomes  covered  with  a 
long,  shaggj^  fur,  or  is  of  a  uniform  chestnut  color.  The 
sheep  of  the  central  Cordilleras,  if  not  shorn,  produces  a 
thick,  matted,  woolly  fleece,  which  gradually  breaks  oflT  in 
shaggy  tufts,  and  leaves  underneath  a  short,  fine  hair, 
shining  and  smooth,  like  that  of  the  goat,  and  the  wool 
never  reappears.  The  same  changes  have  been  produced  in 
geese  and  gallinaceous  fowls.  A  variety  has  sprung  up 
called  rumpless  fowls,  wdiich  want  from  one  to  six  of  the 
caudal  vertebrte.  The  same  varieties  have  sprung  up  in 
other  parts  of  the  world.  The  fat-tailed  sheep  of  Tartary 
loses  it?  posterior  mass  of  fat  when  removed  to  the  steppes 
of  Siberia,  whose  scant  and  bitter  herbage  is  less  favorable 
to  the  secretion  of  adipose  matter.  The  African  sheep  has 
become  large,  like  the  goat,  and  exchanged  its  wool  for  hair. 
TheWallachian  sheep  has  put  on  large,  perpendicular,  spiral 
horns,  and  in  like  manner  become  clothed  with  hair.  Some 
also  have  four,  and  even  six,  horns.  The  wild  horses  of 
Eastern  Siberia  have  the  same  anatomical  difierences  from 
the  tame  ones  that  we  noticed  in  the  case  of  the  swine  ;  and 
culture,  climate,  and  other  causes  have  produced  the  widest 
varieties, — from  the  little,  shaggy  pony  of  the  Shetlands, 
that  scrambles  up  the  highland  crags  like  a  goat,  to  the 
gigantic  steed  of  Flanders,  or  the  Conestoga  of  Pennsyl- 
vania, which  will  sometimes  drag  a  load  of  four  tons  on  the 
level  ground.  "Whether  the  dog  and  the  wolf  are  of  the  same 
species,  is  a  question  about  which  there  is  some  difference  of 
opinion  among  naturalists  ;  but  there  is  a  very  general  agree- 
ment that  all  varieties  of  the  dog-  must  be  referred  to  one 
species.  Between  these  there  is  the  widest  difference, — from 
the  gigantic  St.  Bernard,  that  will  carry  a  frozen  traveler  to  the 
convent;  the  shaggy  Newfoundland,  with  his  webbed  feet 
and  his  aquatic  habits;  and  the  scentless  and  almost  tongue- 


462  THE    UNITF  OF 

less  greyhound ;  to  the  little  lapdog  that  nestles  in  a  lad^-'s 
arms,  the  nosing  foxhound,  whose  scent  is  almost  a  miracle, 
the  ratting  terrier,  and  the  naked  Mexican  dog,  that  has  an 
additional  toe.  The  cow  presents  the  most  diverse  varieties, — 
from  the  little  Surat  ox,  not  larger  than  a  dog,  to  the  humped 
and  long-eared  Brahmin  cow,  and  the  gigantic  prize  ox  that 
will  weigh  two  tons.  The  domesticated  fowls  and  pigeons 
have  assumed  varieties  enough  to  fill  a  page,  .some  of  them 
of  the  most  diverse  character;  varying  from  the  largest  size 
to  the  most  dwarfish,  and  possessing  every  peculiarity  com- 
patible with  the  preservation  of  the  species,  in  the  feathers, 
the  form,  the  wattles,  and  the  psychological  traits  and  habits." 

From  this  brief  summary  of  facts,  is  there  any  greater 
variety  among  the  human  species  than  exists  in  the  different 
species  of  the  lower  orders  of  animals?  Are  we  to  infer  that 
the  diversities  of  color  and  form  are  as  great  even  as  exist 
in  the  species  of  the  dog,  the  cat,  the  sheep,  and  the  ox? 
The  resemblances  in  all  essential  respects  are  identical  in  the 
human  race.  The  race  presents  only  varieties  of  form  and 
color  that  cannot  compare,  in  extent  and  diversity,  to  the 
varieties  existing  in  the  ditferent  species  of  animals. 

Observe  that  the  range  of  circumstances  for  the  existence 
of  the  human  family  is  vastly  greater  than  for  that  of  any 
other  species  of  animals.  Man  exists  all  over  the  earth,  and 
yet  there  is  not  in  any  respect  so  marked  a  difference  as  exists 
among  the  varieties  of  any  one  extended  species  of  animals. 
Why,  then,  when  there  are  greater  reasons  for  varieties  of 
the  human  family  from  greater  combination  of  circumstances, 
and  yet  not  so  great  or  prominent  distinctions  as  are  mani- 
fested in  the  species  of  animals,  should  we,  against  the  voice 
of  history  and  inspiration,  attempt  to  designate  different  ori- 
gins to  the  human  race,  and  not  do  the  same  with  the  varie- 
ties of  the  species  of  dog,  cat,  sheep,  and  oxen  ?  Why  is 
skepticism  reasonable  upon  the  subject  of  man's  single 
parentage  in  denying  it  altogether,  and  unreasonable  when 
it  uses  the  same  argument  in  respect  to  the  varieties  existing 
among  the  different  species  of  animals?  Why  should  we 
doubt  the    origin  of  all  the   human    race  from  Adam,  and 


THE  HUMAN  BACE.  463 

not  believe  that  the  fundamental  idea  of  species  among  ani- 
mals forbids  the  supposition  of  distinct  creations  for  each  ex- 
isting variety  in  the  human  family,  as  it  does  in  the  particu- 
lar species  of  animals  and  birds? 

The  argument  is  simply  this.  Believing  that  the  wide- 
spread varieties  among  each  species  of  animals  must  all, 
from  the  fundamental  idea  of  species,  proceed  from  one  com- 
mon stock,  then,  there  being  no  greater,  or  even  so  great 
varieties  in  the  human  species  as  in  the  lower  species  of  ani- 
mals, it  follows  conclusively  that  the  human  race  also  came 
from  one  stock.  But  there  are  those  who  deny  the  premises 
upon  which  the  argument  from  natural  causes  is  built  to  es- 
tablish the  fact  of  the  unity  of  the  human  race.  We  then 
will  take  those  who  claim  for  the  wide  varieties  of  animals 
a  distinct  creation,  and,  consequcintly,  a  distinct  creation  for 
the  fundamental  varieties  of  the  human  species,  upon  their 
own  ground,  and  show  that  even  there  the  unity  of  the  human 
race  cannot  be  disproved. 

Those  who  deny  the  oneness  of  the  origin  of  man  claim 
at  least  four  marked  varieties  among  the  human  species  as 
having  each  a  distinct  creation.  These  are  the  Caucasian 
race,  the  Mongolian,  the  Indian,  and  the  African  race.  The 
advocate  for  the  distinct  creation  of  the  parentage  of  each  of 
these  races  must  also,  in  consistency,  admit  a  distinct  creation 
for  all  the  existing  varieties  that  are  most  marked  of  the  dif- 
ferent species  of  animals.  All  admit  creation  by  miracle  of 
every  species  of  animals.  The  question  is,  are  the  varieties 
also  created  b}^  miracle?  Are  they  also  placed  by  miracle 
in  their  peculiar  locations?  Miracle,  if  it  means  anything,  is 
something  that  supersedes  or  transcends  natural  law.  We 
do  not  say  the  hair  grows  by  miracle,  but  by  the  agency  of 
natural  law.  What  is  miracle  is  the  creation  of  man  or  the  cre- 
ation of  the  different  species  of  animals.  Natural  law  cannot 
create:  it  may  perpetuate  existence,  but  it  never  can  give  it. 
Whoever  reads  the  Bible  must  be  impressed  with  the  fact 
that  miracle  is  never  resorted  to  except  in  extreme  emer- 
gencies and  under  the  most  imperious  circumstances.  It 
comes  in  only  as  an  extraordinary  event  when  natural  causes 


464  TEE    UNITY  OP 

are  perfectly  inadequate  to  effect  objects  the  most  desirable. 
Thus,  the  creation  of  the  world,  of  the  first  parents,  of  each 
species,  and  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  were  miracles  simply 
because  natural  causes  were  perfectly  inadequate  for  such 
events.  But  where  do  we  find  miracle  resorted  to  except  when 
absolutely  necessary  ?  Where  do  we  find  the  course  of  nature 
interrupted,  and  its  uniformity  broken  in  upon,  except  under 
circumstances  the  most  extraordinary,  and  onl}''  when  the 
sphere  of  law  was  too  limited  to  effect  objects  of  transcend- 
ent importance  ? 

One  great  objection  to  so  many  distinct  creations  among 
men  and  animals  is,  that  there  is  a  superfluity  of  miracle.  It 
has  already  been  seen  that  variety  among  species  is  a  law  as 
needful  as  the  law  of  propagation  of  distinct  species.  Variety 
subserves  purposes  as  useful  within  a  certain  sphere,  as  uni- 
formity out  of  that  sphere.  We  can  well  imagine  the  neces- 
sity for  a  great  variety  of  dogs,  cats,  horses,  oxen,  and  sheep; 
but  we  are  at  a  loss  to  conceive  of  the  benefit  of  an  amals-a- 
mation  together  of  all  these  five  species.  It  is  very  service- 
able to  have  so  great  a  diversity  in  each  species,  but  very 
unserviceable  to  have  one  species  confounded  with  another. 
There  is  a  vast  difference  between  diversity  and  monstrosity. 
Suppose  we  believe  that  natural  causes,  such  as  climate,  habits 
of  life,  domestication,  locality,  etc.,  are  not  sufficient  to  ac- 
count for  the  wide  diversity  existing  among  the  species  of 
animals;  does  the  distinct  creation  of  the  fundamental  varie- 
ties of  each  species  of  dogs,  cats,  horses,  oxen,  and  sheep,  by 
miracle,  present  with  the  placing  of  them  in  different  locali- 
ties a  hypothesis  as  natural,  as  free  from  objection,  as  con- 
sistent with  natural  history  and  revelation,  as  the  hypothesis 
that  God,  when  he  created  each  species  of  animals,  created 
with  that  species  a  principle  of  variety,  not  simply  dependent 
upon  natural  causes,  but  to  a  certain  extent  of  greater  inherent 
potency,  which,  combined  with  natural  causes,  would  even- 
tuate at  the  necessary  period  in  all  the  needful  diversity  of 
species?  Call  this  principle,  if  you  choose,  miraculous  inter- 
position, yet  it  is  vastly  more  simple,  more  free  from  objec- 
tion, more  in  accordance  with  natural  history  and  the  law  of 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  465 

propagation  of  species,  than  the  operation  of  two  distinct 
and  disconnected  influences,  first  miracles  for  each  variety 
of  importance,  and  then  natural  causes. 

Reflect  upon  the  vast  multiplicity  of  miracles,  and  upon  the 
cumbersome  and  complicated  agency  that  is  demanded  to  ac- 
count for  the  diversities  of  the  species  of  animals.  Reflect 
upon  the  unnecessary  amount  of  miracle  involved  in  this  last 
hypothesis.  It  is  a  good  rule  in  philosophy  never  to  bring  in 
more  causes  than  are  appropriate  for  a  given  result.  Where  is 
the  necessity  for  so  many  miracles  ?  It  is  no  reply  to  this 
objection  to  ascribe  to  the  believer  in  the  unity  of  descent 
of  each  species  of  animals  and  of  the  human  race,  the  empty 
sophism  of  continued  supernatural  interposition  to  bring 
about  the  existing  varieties  among  the  different  species  of 
animals  or  of  the  human  race.  It  is  time  enough  to  make 
an  assertion  when  proof  is  given.  We  do  not  hold  to  the 
necessity  of  a  constant  supernatural  intervention  to  account 
for  the  varieties  of  species.  We  believe  that  at  one  bold  stroke 
God  may  have  implanted  in  the  physical  constitution  a  prin- 
ciple amply  sufficient  to  account  for  the  most  wide-spread  va- 
rieties among  species,  in  combination  with  natural  causes. 
We  believe,  if  natural  causes  may  not  of  themselves  account 
for  these  varieties,  law  may,  as  originally  implanted  by  a 
supernatural  agency  in  the  constitution.  Is  not  this  a 
hypothesis  far  more  natural  than  the  twofold  multiplicity 
of  miracle  demanded  by  the  contrary  hypothesis, — first, 
that  by  the  distinct  creation  of  fundamental  varieties; 
second,  that  by  the  placing  of  animals  in  distinct  localities? 
Both  hypotheses  demand  miracle;  but  the  question  is,  Which 
demands  the  fewest  miracles? — which  miracles  upon  the 
most  reasonable  grounds,  and  most  in  harmony  with  the 
agency  of  natural  causes  ? 

The  first  hypothesis,  which  combines  miracle  and  natural 
causes  together,  makes  physical  law,  originally  implanted  in 
the  constitution,  the  great  fact  itself  of  supernatural  interpo- 
sition by  God ;  while  the  latter  hypothesis,  besides  having  as 
many  dividing  lines  in  the  shape  of  varieties  as  there  are 
hairs  upon  the  head,  demands  miracles  as  numerous  as  the 

30 


466  THE   UNITY  OF 

fundamental  varieties  of  the  human  race  and  the  species  of 
animals. 

Let  us  now  confine  our  attention  to  the  race  of  man.  It  is 
objected  to  the  theory  of  natural  causes  and  of  accidental 
varieties  that  they  are  insufficient  to  account  for  the  four 
great  races  included  in  the  Caucasian,  the  Mongolian,  the 
Indian,  and  the  African  race.  Let  us,  for  argument's  sake, 
admit  the  objection.  But  does  it  prove  four  distinct  crea- 
tions ?  Far  from  it.  There  must  yet  be  proved,  from  other 
and  different  sources,  four  distinct  creations.  It  is  not 
enough  to  batter  down  the  argument  of  natural  causes  or 
accidental  varieties.  The  fact  must  be  shown  that  history 
and  inspiration  are  friendly  to  this  hypothesis.  If  both  are 
opposed  to  it,  then  there  remains  a  hypothesis  that  must  be 
overthrown,  or  all  the  learned  disquisitions  to  the  contrary 
amount  to  nothing.  What  matters  the  insufficiency  of  na- 
tural causes  or  incidental  varieties,  if  but  one  solitary  fact 
well  attested  arrays  its  bold  front  against  the  hypothesis  of 
different  creations?  What  matters  it,  provided  upon  the 
score  of  miracle  the  unity  of  the  human  race  from  07\e  origin 
is  more  natural,  through  the  supposition  of  one  great  law  of 
miracle  originally  implanted,  and  if  also,  upon  that  of  history 
and  revelation,  this  unity  of  origin  is  doubly  confirmed?  Are 
facts  to  give  place  to  fanciful  theories  ?  Are  novelties  of 
science  to  browbeat  all  sober  science,  and  with  it  also  the 
voice  of  history  and  revelation  ? 

There  are  those  at  the  present  day  who  think  they  can 
give  proof  of  Moses  tripping  up  upon  great  spiritual  facts 
of  science  and  history.  But  Moses  is  a  far  more  stubborn 
authority  than  many  are  sufficiently  aware  of;  and  a  man 
may  as  well  make  up  his  mind  to  encounter  the  lightnings 
of  Sinai  as  to  demonstrate  in  a  blunder  this  greatest  sage 
of  antiquity.  We  have  read  of  the  weak  sophism  that 
Moses  only  intended  to  teach  great  moral  truths,  and  not 
science.  This,  however,  is  not  the  question.  The  ques- 
tion is.  Did  Moses,  in  fact,  teach  any  'physical  error?  Did 
Moses  inculcate  anything  opposed  to  the  clear  truths  of 
geology,  astronomy,  chemistry,  and  natural  history  ?     This  is 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  467 

the  question.  Not  what  Moses  designed  to  teach,  but  what  in 
fact  he  did  teach.  Believing  that  not  a  single  error  can  be 
found  in  all  his  writings,  w^e  will  not  admit  in  him  blunders 
without  proof.  If  God  gave  him  inspiration  enough  to 
teach  moral  truths,  and  great  facts  of  history  from  the 
earliest  ages,  he  gave  him  inspiration  enough  to  avoid 
making  physical  blunders  that  would  inevitably,  in  a  later 
day,  be  made  the  excuse  for  rejecting  his  morality  and  his 
historj'  in  one  lump,  and  with  it  undermining  the  whole  su- 
perstructure of  the  Bible  as  inspired  by  God.  Inspiration 
has  as  much  to  do  in  keeping  from  all  error  as  in  imparting 
truth ;  and  we  wall  not  bow  to  the  dogmatism  of  those  skep- 
tics who  think  they  have  done  Moses  a  vast  favor  by  indors- 
ing alone,  with  a  patronizing  air,  his  morality  and  civil  code. 
Whether  Moses  was  learned  in  the  new  discoveries  of  modern 
times  or  not,  he  was  made  by  God  sufficiently  learned  not  to 
bring  into  disrepute  the  Bible  by  arraying  it  against  the 
absolute  truth  of  science.  Let  us,  then,  briefly  look  to  two 
sources  of  evidence,  to  show  the  unity  of  the  human  race,  as 
descended  from  one  stock : 

Ist.  History. 

2d.  Miraculous  interposition,  in  combination  with  natural 
law, 

"  We  find,"  says  Layard,  "  that  it  has  been  assumed  and 
reasoned  upon,  as  an  admitted  fact,  that  Egypt  was  first 
peopled  from  Ethiopia  proper, — that  is,  from  the  countries  to 
the  south  of  it.  That  Egypt  was  settled  by  the  children  of 
Mizraim,  the  second  son  of  Ham,  is  universally  admitted. 
But  that  the  land  from  whence  they  came  and  peopled 
Egypt  was  Ethiopia,  is  not  made  probable  b}'^  any  good  evi- 
dence. It  has  been  supposed  that  Meroe,  the  capital  of  Ethi- 
opia, was  the  cradle  of  Thebes,  and  that  the  nation  of  the  Ethi- 
opians lived  under  a  civil  and  religious  system  identical  with 
that  of  Egypt,  long  before  Egypt  was  inhabited.  But  there 
are  many  monumental  and  historical  evidences  to  the  con- 
trary. The  pyramids  were,  by  the  unanimous  tradition  of 
the  Egyptian  priests,  the  oldest  monuments  of  Egypt;  but 
they  are  not  in  the  neighborhood  of  Thebes,  but  of  Memphis, 
on  the  crown  of  the  delta,  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Nile. 


468  '^HE    UNITY  OF 

"  The  first  mortal  who  ruled  Egypt,  according  to  Manetho, 
was  Menes.  This  name  occurs  at  the  head  of  a  procession 
of  statues  of  the  kings  of  Egypt,  depicted  on  one  of  the 
walls  of  the  palace  of  Luxor,  at  Thebes.  This  king  is  said 
to  have  laid  the  foundation  of  Memphis,  which  was  hitherto 
a  marsh,  by  means  of  embankments,  lakes,  and  other  arti- 
ficial means.  Josephus,  the  Jewish  historian,  informs  us  that 
he  lived  many  years  before  the  times  of  Abraham.  From 
the  monuments  of  Ethiopia  the  inference  from  the  inscrip- 
tions is  that  they  were  among  the  most  ancient  erected  in 
the  eighteenth  dynasty  of  the  kings  of  Egypt,  who  reigned 
long  after  Egypt  became  a  settled  kingdom.  They  also 
intimate  plainly  that  Ethiopia  was  a  province  or  dependency 
of  Egypt,  and  continued  apparently  so  until  the  Psammeticus, 
about  five  hundred  years  before  Christ.  The  picture  of  a 
pyramid  forms  a  part  of  the  hieroglyphic  name  of  Memphis, 
and  the  inference  is,  from  the  immutability  of  all  things  in 
Egypt,  that  the  foundation  of  the  pyramids  was  coeval  with 
that  of  the  city.  The  form  of  the  temple  of  Belus,  at  Baby- 
lon, according  to  Herodotus,  was  pyramidal.  It  is  also  an 
ascertained  fact  that  the  ancient  idolatries,  all  over  the  world, 
particularly  affected  this  form  in  their  sacred  edifices.  These 
circumstances,  with  others,  render  it  probable  that  the  temple 
of  Belus  served  for  an  example  and  pattern  of  the  pyramids 
of  Egypt.  Thus,  the  early  migration  to  Egypt  was  not  from 
Ethiopia,  but  the  plain  of  Shinar,  or  from  the  banks  of  the 
Euphrates,  where  once  stood  the  city  of  Babylon,  near  the 
place  of  the  tower  of  Babel.  It  was  soon  after  the  confusion 
of  tongues  that  befell  the  impious  builders  of  Babel,  about 
two  thousand  two  hundred  and  sixty- six  years  before  Christ, 
that  we  have  good  evidence  to  believe  there  first  proceeded 
the  emigration  to  Egypt,  and  the  settlement  of  the  country. 
We  must  look  to  the  Bible  for  our  clearest  light  upon  the 
first  settlement  of  Egypt." 

Before  the  confusion  of  tongues  there  was  but  one  language 
spoken.  We  know  that  the  plain  of  Shinar  was  the  place 
where  the  tower  of  Babel  was  built.  It  was  then  from  an- 
cient Assyria,  in  the  land  of  Chaldea,  that  civilization  and 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  469 

the  arts  came  to  Egypt,  and  all  the  monumental  evidences 
of  Egypt  evince  the  fact,  so  clearly  established  in  the  Bible, 
that  its  early  origin  is  to  be  attributed  not  to  a  roving  tribe 
dwelling  in  Ethiopia,  but  to  the  builders  of  the  tower  of 
Babel  or  their  immediate  descendants. 

There  is  one  strong  probability,  from  the  comparison  be- 
tween the  ancient  language  of  the  Egyptians  and  that  of  the 
Shemitic  race,  through  the  line  of  the  ancient  Hebrews. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  origin  of  language  with  al- 
phabetical characters  could  not  be  of  mere  human  invention. 
"Without  a  written  language,  society  goes  back  to  barbarism. 
N^ow,  it  was  not  from  the  savage  state,  but  from  the  civilized 
state,  that  all  nations  had  their  origin.  The  fact  that  before 
the  confusion  of  Babel  the  earth  was  of  one  tongue  implies  a 
high  degree  of  civilization.  "Without  a  common  language 
there  could  be  no  union  and  no  great  undertaking.  The  im- 
pious attempt  to  build  a  tower  for  idolatrous  purposes,  with 
the  monumental  evidences  of  it,  and  all  the  intimations  of 
sacred  and  profane  history,  shows  this.  One  great  effect  of 
the  confusion  of  tongues,  and  the  dispersion  of  those  en- 
gaged in  erecting  the  tower  of  Babel,  would  be  to  bring  on, 
in  the  course  of  time,  an  uncivilized  state.  It  is  clearly 
shown  in  the  Scriptures  that  the  descendants  of  Shem  re- 
tained longer  than  those  of  Ham  or  Japheth  the  knowledge 
of  God,  and  were  to  a  greater  extent  free  from  idolatry. 

The  inference  must  be  plain,  that  the  curse  of  the  confu- 
sion of  tongues  would  rest  more  lightly  upon  them  than  upon 
those  who  descended  from  Ham  and  Japheth.  The  descend- 
ants of  Shem  have  always  written  alphabetically  the  most 
perfect  kind  of  writing. 

The  Shemitic  race  was  permitted  to  take  up  their  residence 
not  far  removed  from  the  scene  of  the  confusion  of  tongues. 
But  the  unhappy  sons  of  Mizraim,  the  son  of  Ham,  appear 
to  have  wandered  forth  from  their  habitation  disabled  from 
any  longer  articulating  the  sounds  of  that  which  has  been 
the  language  of  the  whole  human  race. 

When  we  have  arrived  at  the  great  fact  that  Egypt  was 
settled  not  by  a  roving  tribe  of  Ethiopians,  but  by  the  im- 


470  THE    UNITY  OF 

mediate  descenaants  of  the  builders  of  the  tower  of  Babel 
upon  the  plain  of  Shinar,  then,  knowing  the  origin  of  one  of 
the  most  ancient  of  the  nations  of  antiquity,  we  have  a 
stand-point  of  the  highest  value  in  tracing  the  historic  unity 
of  the  human  family  as  descended  from  one  stock.  Two 
great  events  are  clearly  proved  by  sacred  and  profane  his- 
tory:  first  the  deluge,  and  then  the  confusion  of  tongues  upon 
the  plain  of  Shinar,  two  thousand  two  hundred  and  sixtj'-six 
years  before  Christ. 

A¥e  will  not  enter  upon  the  disputed  question  of  the  extent 
of  the  deluge  ;  the  only  fact  of  material  importance  to  know 
is,  whether  it  was  so  universal  as  to  drown  all  the  existing 
families  of  the  earth  but  one,  that  of  ]^oah.  We  have  not 
the  slightest  proof  that  any  of  the  antediluvians  survived  the 
flood  except  the  family  of  ISToah.  Sacred  history  is  strength- 
ened by  profane  history  in  the  position  that  this  great  catas- 
trophe completed  the  ruin  of  all  but  one  family  of  the  ante- 
diluvians. Great  speculations  have  been  made  to  show  the 
vast  extent  of  the  population  of  the  world  at  the  time  of  the 
flood;  but,  in  our  opinion,  the  number  of  the  antediluvians 
was  far  less  than  is  commonly  supposed.  From  the  great 
longevity  of  the  inhabitants  before  the  flood,  Methuselah 
being  removed  but  three  generations  from  Adam,  we  know 
that  the  ratio  of  increase  could  not  correspond  with  that  which 
exists  under  our  short-lived  generations,  which,  upon  the 
most  liberal  calculation,  do  not  extend  over  thirty-five  years 
as  an  average. 

The  drowning  of  the  Old  World  must,  according  to  the  in- 
timations of  history,  have  swept  away  a  population  that  was 
mostly  included  in  a  comparatively  limited  extent  of  country. 
That  event  taking  place,  according  to  the  common  chro- 
nology, in  the  year  of  the  world  1788,  we  have  only  one  hun- 
dred and  thirty-two  years  intervening  from  the  flood  to  the 
building  of  Babel  and  the  confusion  of  tongues;  and  we  are 
informed  that  Noah  lived  after  the  flood  three  hundred  and 
fifty  years.  The  evidence,  then,  is  very  clear  that  we  have 
first  the  year  of  the  world  1656,  or  nearly  that,  to  show  that 
the  deluge  swept  oft'  a  race  of  men  evidently  in  their  Ian- 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  471 

guage  homogeneous,  and  in  their  local  residence  living  near 
together.  And  then  to  show  also  that  there  was  but  one  lan- 
guage and  nation  upon  the  earth,  we  have  another  period, 
the  building  of  the  tower  of  Babel  and  the  confusion  of 
tongues,  one  hundred  and  thirty-two  years  after,  and,  accord- 
ing to  the  common  reckoning,  two  hundred  and  eighteen 
years  before  the  death  of  Noah.  Admitting  the  longevity  of 
the  antediluvians,  we  are  distinctly  informed  that  the  whole 
earth  was  of  one  language  and  of  one  speech,  in  the  first  verse 
of  the  eleventh  of  Genesis,  and  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  verses 
of  the  same  chapter,  we  are  also  told  that  the  "  Lord  scat- 
tered them  abroad  from  thence  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth, 
and  they  left  off  to  build  the  city.  Therefore  is  the  name  of 
it  called  Babel;  because  the  Lord  did  there  confound  the 
language  of  all  the  earth." 

Now,  history,  both  sacred  and  profane,  assures  us  that  the 
three  sons  of  Noah,  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth,  were,  with 
their  immediate  descendants,  each,  a  few  years  after  the  con- 
fusion of  tongues,  the  patriarchs  of  three  great  divisions  of 
the  earth,  not  exelnsively,  but  generally.,  the  original  founders 
of  Asia,  Africa,  and  Europe.  To  Shem,  with  his  grandsons, 
was  portioned  out  Asia,  to  Ham  Africa,  to  Japheth  Europe. 
The  issue  of  the  three  sons  of  Noah,  as  they  are  set  down  in 
Holy  Writ,  are,  commencing  with  Japheth, — the  sons  Gomer, 
Magog,  Madai,  Javan,  Tubal,  Meshech,  and  Tiras.  From 
Gomer  descended  the  Cimbrians;  from  Magog  the  Scyth- 
ians and  Turks;  from  Madai  the  Medes ;  from  Javan  the 
lonians,  Greeks;  from  Meshech  the  Muscovites;  from  Tiras 
the  Thracians. 

The  sons  of  Shem  were  Asshur,  Mynas,  or  Elam,  Ar- 
phaxad,  Lud,  and  Aram.  From  Asshur  came  the  Assyrians  • 
from  Mynas, or  Elam,  the  Persians ;  from  Arphaxad  the  Chal- 
deans ;  from  Lud  the  Syrians,  and  from  Aram  the  Aramites. 

The  sons  of  Ham  were  Gush,  Mizraim,  Phut,  and  Canaan. 
From  Gush  descended  Nimrod,  from  whom  came  the  Ethi- 
opians ;  from  Mizraim  descended  the  Egyptians ;  from 
Phut  the  Mauritanians;  and  from  Canaan  descended  the  Ca- 
naanites. 


472  T'RE    UNITY  OF 

Thus  does  tlie  voice  of  history  identify  the  peopling  of  the 
earth  with  the  descendants  of  the  family  of  Noah.  But  that 
family  were  evidently  homogeneous  in  their  language  with  the 
antediluvians,  and  in  their  features  resembled  those  who 
were  swept  away  by  the  flood. 

We  have,  then,  the  starting-point  of  the  confusion  of 
tongues  at  Babel,  from  whence  to  trace  the  vast  differences 
of  language  that  subsequently  arose.  We  know  that  the 
peopling  of  the  earth  and  the  dispersion  of  the  inhabitants 
over  the  earth  must  proceed  from  necessity,  rather  than  from 
choice.  A  race  of  men  who  are  homogeneous  in  language, 
customs,  habits,  color,  etc.  do  not  readily  emigrate  into  dif- 
ferent portions  of  the  world,  far  apart  and  separated  from 
each  other  by  natural  obstacles  of  great  power.  Men  are 
naturally  social  in  their  tendencies,  and  it  is  impossible  that 
the  whole  race  will  be  dismembered,  and  form  separate  and 
distinct  parties,  which  diverge  from  each  other  with  increas- 
ing energy  from  year  to  year,  unless  there  are  causes  of 
mighty  efficacy  at  work  to  bring  about  this  end.  The  con- 
fusion of  tongues  presents  the  solution  of  the  most  difficult 
problem  of  history,  even  the  fundamental  differences  of  lan- 
guage. That  confusion  was  effected  evidently  by  miraculous 
agency,  and  was  of  such  power  as  to  secure  the  widest  dis- 
persion over  the  earth.  It  has  been  seen  that  Nimrod  was 
the  father  of  the  Ethiopians,  and  Mizraim,  the  second  son 
of  Ham,  of  the  Egyptians. 

"  There  is  nothing,"  says  Layard,  "  in  history,  either  sacred 
or  profane,  or  in  the  traditions  handed  down  to  us,  against 
attributing  the  highest  antiquity  to  the  Assyrian  empire.  In 
the  land  of  Shinar,  in  the  country  watered  by  the  Tigris  and 
the  Euphrates,  the  Scriptures  place  the  earliest  habitations 
of  the  human  race.  We  have  evidence  that  at  the  earliest 
period  the  belief  was  current,  both  among  the  Egyptians 
and  Jews,  that  the  first  settlements  were  in  Assyria,  and  that 
from  Chaldea  civilization  and  the  arts  and  sciences  were 
spread  over  the  world.  Abraham  and  his  family,  above  1900 
years  before  Christ,  migrated  from  a  land  already  thickly  in 
habited  and  possessing  great  cities.     According  to  Josephus, 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  473 

the  four  confederate  kings  who  marched  in  the  time  of  the 
patriarchs  against  the  people  of  Sodom  and  the  neighboring 
cities  were  under  a  king  of  Assyria  whose  empire  extended 
all  over  Asia." 

We  arrive,  then,  at  a  conclusion,  confirmed  by  sacred  and 
profane  history,  that  the  gross  idolatry  that  prevailed  in 
Egypt  had  its  origin  in  Assyria,  and  that,  as  early  as  the 
time  of  Abraham,  Egypt  was  far  advanced  in  civilization, 
and  even  then  the  seat  of  monuments  pointing  out  to  the 
aged  patriarch  an  origin  from  the  plain  of  Shinar.  The  curse 
pronounced  against  Babylon,  consigning  one  of  the  most 
fertile  portions  of  the  earth  to  the  most  fearful  desolation, 
lay  evidentlj'  in  a  deeper  cause  than  the  mere  oppression  of 
the  Jews.  Egypt  oppressed  them  more,  but  its  punishment 
has  not  been  so  conspicuous.  Babylon  was  far  more  the 
mother  of  idolatry  than  of  oppression.  Here  originated 
those  germs  of  error  that  found  in  Egypt  so  prolific  a  soil. 
The  first  settlers  on  the  banks  of  the  Nile  were  idolaters. 
From  the  first  truths  in  respect  to  God,  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  we 
notice  upon  their  monuments  the  most  striking  evidence  of 
successive  stages  of  degeneracy,  by  which  the  earlier  intima- 
tions of  sacred  truth  were  hidden  under  a  darker  robe  of 
idolatry.  The  deification  of  the  sun  appears  to  be  the 
earliest  form  under  which  idolatry  manifested  itself  From 
a  metaphor,  or  type  of  God,  the  sun  became  a  symbol,  an 
image, — God's  vicegerent,  his  living  representative, — God 
himself.  There  is  hardly  a  monument  upon  which  that 
luminary  is  not  represented  and  invoked  as  a  deity.  Thus 
the  unity  of  God  was  set  forth  in  a  way  that  led  the  people  into 
polytheism,  while  the  real  unity  of  the  Deity  was  known  only 
to  the  priests,  and  hidden  from  the  common  people.  The 
result  was  soon  the  grossest  form  of  idol  worship.  Animal 
worship,  according  to  Manetho,  was  introduced  by  Chous,  the 
second  king  of  the  second  dynasty.  The  origin  of  this  appears 
to  have  been  the  endeavor  to  express  in  their  picture-writing 
the  various  attributes  of  God,  by  the  delineation  of  a  living 
being  possessing,  as  they  fancied,  similar  attributes.     Thus, 


474  THE    UNITY  OF 

the  hawk  was  the  living  representative  or  embodied  symbol 
of  man}'  gods.  In  the  same  spirit  of  coarse  symbolism,  the 
vigilance  and  watchful  care  of  God  over  the  creation  were 
degraded  into  the  likeness  of  a  dog.  The  vengeance  of  God 
was  personified  under  the  form  of  a  crocodile,  or  an  idol 
having  the  head  of  this  reptile.  But  the  study  of  the  Egyp- 
tian temples  reveals  the  fact  that  they  were  acquainted  with 
the  mysterious  truth  of  the  triple  existence  of  God,  The 
primary  form  or  antitype  of  their  mythology  is  a  triad  of 
divinities,  composed  of  Ammou,  the  father,  Mout,  the 
mother,  and  Chous,  the  infant  son.  This  triad  passes  through 
an  immense  number  of  intermediate  triads,  until  it  reaches 
the  earth,  where,  under  the  forms  of  Osiris,  Isis,  and  Horus, 
it  becomes  incarnate.  Thus,  the  innumerable  idols  of  Egypt 
had  their  origin  from  the  perversions  of  sacred  truth,  and 
reveal  the  fact  that  the  land  of  the  Chaldees — the  region 
washed  by  the  Tigris  and  the  Euphrates — was  the  mother 
of  those  impious  idolatries  that  brought  on  the  ruin  of  Nine- 
veh and  Babylon. 

We  have  thus  shown  that  the  plain  of  Shinar,  in  Chaldea, 
where  stood  the  tower  of  Babel,  evidently  points  out  the 
source  of  the  lirst  emigration  into  Egypt,  and  was  the  ear- 
liest cradle  of  the  civilization  of  the  earth.  What  follows, 
but  that  to  the  marked  event  that  brought  on  the  change  of 
language  and  the  dispersion  over  the  earth  we  are  to  at- 
tribute those  essential  differences  that  subsequently  have 
characterized  the  human  race  ? 

If  one  clear  case  of  miraculous  interposition  can  be  made 
out  to  account  for  the  diversities  of  the  human  language, 
then  certainly  one  of  the  most  marked  peculiarities  that 
appear  in  the  different  nations  of  the  earth  can  be  accounted 
for.  We  say,  then,  to  him  who  denies  the  unity  of  the  race 
from  one  stock,  that,  even  supposing  incidental  varieties  and 
natural  causes  not  sufficient  to  account  for  such  a  wide-spread 
diversity,  it  does  not  follow  that  there  are  no  other  causes 
independent  of  distinct  creations,  in  different  localities,  to 
account  for  the  wide  differences  existing  in  the  form,  color, 
and  anatomical  constr'iction    of  the  diverse  nations  of  the 


THE  HUMAN  RACE.  475 

earth.  Suppose  the  great  law  of  adaptation,  in  combination 
with  habit,  climate,  distinct  locality,  etc.,  does  not  clearly 
reveal  the  secret  of  human  diversities;  are  we  therefore 
driven  to  the  hypothesis  of  distinct  creations  at  difterent 
periods  of  the  world  ?     Certainly  not. 

We  can  trace  the  thread  of  history  to  a  period  when  the 
whole  earth  was  of  one  language.  "We  can  trace  the  origin 
of  nations  to  the  three  sons  of  Noah  and  their  immediate 
descendants.  We  can  trace  upon  the  monuments  of  Egypt 
and  Assyria  the  birthplace  of  these  respective  countries. 
We  can  trace  the  first  great  break  in  one  universal  language. 
tVe  can  see  miracle  as  clearl}'  inscribed  upon  the  confusion 
of  tongues  as  upon  the  first  creation  of  man.  AVe  have, 
then,  only  to  say  that  if  the  researches  of  science  compel  to 
the  conclusion  that  incidental  varieties  and  natural  causes 
will  not  satisfactorily  account  for  the  fundamental  diver- 
sities existing  in  the  four  great  races  of  the  earth,  there 
remains  another  hypothesis  that  must  be  overturned  before 
any  good  reason  can  be  found  for  four  or  more  distinct  crea- 
tions of  man.  The  miracle  invoked  to  account,  if  needed, 
for  the  diversities  of  the  human  family  at  the  confusion  of 
tongues,  in  combination  w^ith  natural  causes,  is  far  more 
probable  than  the  contrary  hypothesis  of  varied  and  distinct 
miracles  of  creation  at  difi^erent  times  and  in  difl:erent  lo- 
calities. 

The  great  catastrophe  of  the  confusion  of  tongues  intro- 
ducing with  it  organic  changes  and  fundamental  varieties  of 
color  and  form,  to  be  more  permanently  developed  in  after- 
ages  in  combination  with  difl[ereuces  of  habit,  climate,  coun- 
try, and  other  causes,  is  a  hypothesis,  to  say  the  least,  that 
cannot  be  shown  false.  It  is  vastly  more  in  unison  with  his- 
tory, sacred  and  profane ;  it  is  amply  sufiicient  for  the  great- 
est changes ;  and  there  is  no  argument  which  can  avail  to 
overthrow  it  upon  the  ground  of  the  impotency  of  natural 
causes. 

Above  all  things,  the  voice  of  history,  the  earliest  tradi- 
tions of  mankind,  point  to  the  family  of  Noah  as  a  second 
time  peopling  the    earth,  and   as   the   only  stock   whence 


476  THE    UNITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  BACE. 

have  issued  the  existing  varieties  of  the  race  of  man  ;  and 
whoever  denies  this  has  a  harder  task  before  him  to  sustain 
his  position  than  ever  Pharaoh  had  in  making  war  against 
the  ten  plagues  of  Egypt. 

Thus  we  see  the  twofold  difficulty  to  overcome,  of  those 
who  deny  the  unitj'  of  the  human  race  from  one  common 
parentage.  First,  they  must  show,  upon  the  ground  of  natural 
causes,  that  the  diversities  existing  in  the  human  species  are 
greater  than  those  existing  in  the  species  of  dogs,  horses, 
sheep,  oxen,  cats,  etc.  Secondly,  they  must  show  that,  pro- 
vided the  diversities  in  the  human  race  are  greater,  or  that 
natural  causes  may  not  be  sufficient  to  account  for  them,  God 
did  not,  at  the  confusion  of  tongues  upon  the  plain  of  Shinar, 
by  one  bold  interposition  of  miracle,  in  connection  with  natu- 
ral causes,  bring  about  all  the  existing  varieties  in  the  human 
family.  We  do  not  see  any  necessity  for  introducing  miracle 
at  all  in  securing  the  known  diversity  in  the  human  race,  for 
we  do  not  see  in  this  race  such  great  varieties  as  exist  in 
the  different  species  of  animals;  but,  if  miracle  must  be  in- 
voked to  account  for  these  varieties  among  men,  yet  even 
then  we  must  see  that  one  miracle  such  as  that  which  took 
place  at  Babel,  is  an  hypothesis  far  more  reasonable,  and 
more  in  accordance  with  history,  than  four,  six,  or  a  greater 
number  of  miracles  in  the  creation,  in  different  parts  of  the 
earth,  of  those  marked  diversities  that  appear  in  the  human 
family. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

INTEGRITY  OF  THE  SACRED  CANON. 

The  New  Testament  canon  contains  no  book  written  by 
Christ,  It  consists  of  five  historical  books,  one  prophetical, 
and  twenty-one  epistolary.  Of  the  historical  books,  four, 
called  Gospels,  are  ascribed  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and 
John.  They  contain  brief  histories  of  the  life  and  death  of 
Christ,  his  teachings,  and  his  resurrection.  The  fifth,  called 
the  Acts,  is  ascribed  to  Luke.  Of  the  Epistles,  fourteen  are 
ascribed  to  Paul;  the  remaining  seven,  called  Catholic,  are  as- 
cribed one  to  James,  two  to  Peter,  three  to  John,  and  one  to 
Jude.  The  only  prophetical  book  is  ascribed  to  John,  the 
author  of  the  Gospel  and  the  three  Epistles. 

Consider,  first,  the  language  and  the  style.  After  the  con- 
quests of  Alexander  the  Great,  the  various  dialects  of  the 
Greeks  became  mingled  together  and  extensively  diffused  all 
over  the  East.  The  Greek  became  the  court  language  of  the 
Romans  in  the  East.  While,  therefore,  the  Syro-Chaldaic,  or 
Hebrew,  was  the  vernacular  tongue  of  the  Jews  who  resided 
in  Palestine,  Greek  was  extensively  spoken  as  the  language 
of  commerce.  Thus  the  Greek,  partaking  of  the  Jewish 
idiom,  was  the  dialect  current  at  the  time,  in  which  are  in- 
terspersed some  traces  of  the  Latin  language.  Such  is,  in 
fact,  the  language  of  the  New  Testament,  in  its  style  and 
manner.  In  its  minute  correspondences  it  was  just  what 
might  be  expected  of  the  age  in  which  it  was  written.  "What 
now  is  the  external  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  the  New 
Testament  ? 

Let  us  commence  with  the  age  of  the  apostles.  Barnabas 
of  Cyprus  is  frequently  mentioned  as  a  co-laborer  of  Paul; 
Clement,  as  a  fellow-laborer  of  Paul,  afterward  Bishop  of 

(477) 


478  INTEGBITY  OF   THE 

Rome;  Hermas,  probably  the  same  saluted  by  Paul  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans ;  Ignatius,  Bishop  of  Antioch,  in 
Syria,  where  he  is  said  to  have  been  ordained  by  Peter ; 
Polycarp,  a  disciple  of  John,  ordained  by  him  Bishop  of 
Smyrna,  where  he  died  a  martyr  ;  and  Papias,  the  companion 
of  Polycarp.  Now,  -in  the  brief  writings  and  fragments  of 
these  few  apostolical  fathers  which  have  descended  to  us  we 
find  nearly  all  the  books  of  our  New  Testament  quoted  or 
alluded  to ;  nor  did  they  recognize  any  other  books  than 
those  in  our  canon. 

Let  us  descend  a  little  later  into  the  second  century,  and 
examine  the  writings  of  Justin  Martyr,  a.d,  140,  of  Ire- 
nseus,  A.D.  178,  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  a.d.  194,  and  of 
Tertullian,  a.d.  200.  Justin  tells  us  that  the  memoirs  and 
records  of  the  apostles  and  their  companions  were  read  and 
expounded  in  the  assemblies  of  Christians  for  divine  worship 
on  the  Sabbath-day.  Irenteus  says,  "  there  were  but  four 
gospels,"  the  same  as  we  now  have;  he  also  says  of  Poly- 
carp, whom  he  had  seen  in  his  youth,  "  I  can  tell  the  place 
in  which  the  blessed  Polycarp  sat  and  taught,  and  his  going 
out  and  coming  in,  and  the  manner  of  his  life,  and  the  form 
of  his  person,  and  the  discourses  he  made  to  the  people, 
and  how  he  related  his  conversation  with  John  and  others 
who  had  seen  the  Lord,  both  concerning  his  miracles  and  his 
doctrines,  as  he  had  received  them  from  the  eye-witnesses  of 
the  word  of  life ;  all  which  Polycarp  related  agreeably  to  the 
Scriptures." 

Of  Polycarp  one  undoubted  epistle  remains;  and  in  this, 
though  short,  we  have  about  forty  clear  allusions  to  the  New 
Testament.  Twenty-five  or  thirty-five  years  after  follows 
Justin  Martyr,  universally  known  in  the  ancient  Church.  In 
his  writings  are  thirty-five  plain  quotations  from  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew  alone,  and  in  one  part  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  in  the  very  words  of  Matthew.  Ire- 
nseus  mentions  the  code  of  the  New  Testament  as  well  as  the 
Old,  and  calls  the  one,  as  the  other,  the  oracles  of  God.  Says 
Irenseus,  "  We  have  not  received  the  knowledge  of  the  way 
of  our  salvation  by  any  other  than  those  by  whom  the  gospel 


SACRED    CANON.  479 

has  been  brought  to  us :  which  gospel  they  first  preached, 
and  afterwards  by  the  will  of  God  committed  to  writing,  that 
it  might  be,  for  all  time  to  come,  the  foundation  and  pillar  of 
our  faith.  For  after  our  Lord  arose  from  the  dead,  and  they 
were  endued  from  above  with  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
coming  down  upon  them,  they  received  a  perfect  knowledge 
of  all  things.  They  then  went  forth  to  all  the  ends  of  the 
earth,  declaring  to  men  the  blessing  of  heavenly  peace,  having 
all  of  them,  and  every  one  alike,  the  gospel  of  God.  Mat- 
thew, then  among  the  Jews,  wrote  a  gospel  in  their  own  lan- 
guage, while  Peter  and  Paul  were  preaching  the  gospel  at 
Rome  and  founding  a  church  there;  and,  after  their  exit, 
Mark,  another  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter,  delivered  to 
us  in  writing  the  things  that  had  been  preached  by  Peter; 
and  Luke,  the  companion  of  Paul,  put  down  in  a  book  the 
gospel  preached  by  him.  Afterward,  John,  the  disciple  of 
the  Lord,  who  also  leaned  upon  his  breast,  likewise  pub- 
lished a  gospel  while  he  dwelt  at  Ephesus,  in  Asia." 

Says  Justin  Martyr,  speaking  of  the  general  usage  of  the 
Christian  Church,  "  The  memoirs  of  the  apostles  or  the  writ- 
ings of  the  prophets  are  read  according  as  the  time  allows ; 
and,  when  the  reader  has  ended,  the  president  makes  a  dis- 
course." 

Polycarp,  a  Companion  of  the  apostles,  says,  "  I  trust  ye 
are  well  exercised  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  in  these  Scrip- 
tures it  is  said,  '  Be  ye  angry  and  sin  not;'  "  thus  showing 
that  there  were  Scripture  writings  distinguished  as  the 
"Holy  Scriptures."  Li  the  first  century  we  have  more  than 
two  hundred  quotations  and  allusions  to  our  sacred  books,  in 
which  there  is  an  incidental  testimony  more  valuable  than 
any  formal  testimon}^  could  be.  In  the  second  centur}^  the 
testimony  is  more  full  and  express.  Of  this  age  there  are 
thirty-six  writers  whose  works  in  some  parts  have  come  down 
to  us.  In  the  third  and  fourth  centuries  there  are  more  than 
one  hundred  authors  whose  works  testily  to  the  authenticity 
of  these  books.  Dr.  Lardner,  in  speaking  of  the  works  of 
Irenseus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  TertuUian,  says, 
"There  are  perhaps  more  and  larger  quotations  of  the  small 


480  INTEGBITY  OF  THE 

volume  of  the  New  Testament  than  of  all  the  works  of 
Cicero,  though  of  so  uncommon  excellence  for  thought  and 
style,  in  the  writers  of  all  characters  for  several  ages." 

There  have  descended  to  us  thirteen  well-authenticated 
catalogues  of  the  genuine  and  canonical  books  in  the  two 
following  centuries.  In  settling  the  canon  we  find  from 
Eusebius,  a.d.  315,  that  there  were  seven  books  concerning 
which  the  grounds  of  the  doubts  are  fully  given.  He  says, 
"  In  the  first  place  are  to  be  ranked  the  sacred  four  Gospels  ; 
then  the  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles ;  after  that  are  to 
be  reckoned  the  Epistles  of  Paul ;  in  the  next  place,  that 
called  the  First  Epistle  of  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  Peter,  are 
to  be  esteemed  authentic.  After  this  is  to  be  placed  the 
Revelation  of  John,  about  which  we  shall  observe  the  dif- 
ferent opinions  at  proper  seasons.  Of  the  controverted,  yet 
well  known  or  approved  by  the  most,  are  that  called  the 
Epistle  of  James,  and  that  of  Jude,  and  the  second  of  Peter, 
and  the  second  and  third  of  John,  whether  written  by  the 
evangelist  or  by  another  of  the  same  name."  But  concern- 
ing the  last  all  doubts  were  gradually  removed;  and  by  the 
time  of  Jerome  and  Augustine,  a.d.  342-420,  many  cata- 
logues are  given,  including  our  present  books  and  none 
other. 

President  Hopkins,  in  a  very  comprehensive  yet  brief 
manner,  embodies  a  great  amount  of  argument  upon  the 
integrity  and  authenticity  of  the  books  of  the  I^ew  Testa- 
ment ;  and  we  shall  from  him  make  a  few  extracts. 

"While,  therefore,  it  appears  that  the  writings  of  thelSTew 
Testament  were  some  of  them  collected  into  a  volume  in  the 
apostolical  times,  under  the  name  of  the  Gospels  and  the 
Epistles ;  while  the  references  to  this  volume  during  the 
second  century  are  almost  numberless;  while  no  doubt  ever 
arose  respecting  the  mass  of  then;, — still,  the  book  which  we 
now  receive  was  not,  in  all  its  parts,  formally  agreed  upon, 
in  consequence  of  a  careful  examination  of  ancient  testi- 
mony, until  between  three  and  four  hundred  years  after  the 
birth  of  Christ.     It  will  be  remembered,  however,  that  if 


^SACBED    CANON.  481 

every  part  of  the  ITew  Testament  concerning  which  there  was 
then  dispute  were  blotted  out,  the  argument  for  the  truth  of 
Christianity  woukl  not  l)e  in  the  least  invalidated.  There  is, 
therefore,  direct  evidence,  as  perfect  as  the  nature  of  the  case 
admits,  that  those  writings  on  which  we  depend  for  the  truth 
of  the  Christian  religion  have  existed,  and  were  received 
without  doubt,  from  the  very  first.  So  full  and  unexception- 
able is  the  testimony  thus  given  by  the  early  writers,  that  it 
woukl  seem,  in  the  absence  of  anything  to  contradict  it  or  to 
throw  over  it  the  slightest  discredit,  that  further  evidence 
could  not  be  needed.  Indeed,  if  we  were  to  stop  here  we 
should  have  a  body  of  evidence  for  the  authenticity  of  these 
writings  such  as  can  be  adduced  in  favor  of  no  others  of 
equal  antiquity.  The  writings  of  Cicero  are  quoted  by 
Quintilian,  which  shows  that  they  were  then  extant  and 
ascribed  to  him.  But  the  writings  of  Cicero  excited  no  con- 
troversy; they  gave  rise  to  no  general  opposition;  they 
created  no  sects.  Hence  we  have  no  means  of  knowing 
how  these  works  were  regarded  by  enemies  or  by  rival 
parties  appealing  to  their  authority.  This,  when  it  can  be 
obtained,  is  the  very  highest  kind  of  evidence ;  and  in 
respect  to  the  Christian  Scriptures  it  is  most  full  and  satis- 
factory. The  heretical  writers  do  indeed  sometimes  deny 
that  the  apostle  or  writer  is  an  infallible  authority ;  but  they 
never  deny  that  the  books  were  written  by  those  to  whom 
they  were  ascribed.  Thus,  the  Cerinthians  and  the  Ebionites, 
who  sprang  up  while  St.  John  was  yet  living,  wished  to 
retain  the  Mosaic  law,  and  hence  rejected  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  while  they  retained  the  Gospel  of  Matthew;  and  Mar- 
cion,  A.D.  130,  who  rejected  the  Old  Testament  and  was  ex- 
communicated, though  greatly  incensed,  and  though  he 
speaks  disparagingly  of  several  of  the  books,  nowhere  inti- 
mates that  they  were  forgeries. 

"The  same  may  be  said  of  the  ancient  sects.  "We  have, 
also,  the  indirect  testimony  of  the  enemies  of  Christianity,  as 
Celsus,  Porphyry,  and  Julian.  Of  these,  Celsas  flourished 
only  about  a  hundred  years  after  the  Gospels  were  published, 

31 


482  INTEGRITY  OF  THE 

and  was  an  acute  and  bitter  adversary;  and  it  seems  quite 
impossible  that  any  one  of  them,  much  more  the  whole, 
should  have  been  forged  and  yet  he  not  know  or  suspect  it. 
He  attacks  the  books ;  he  speaks  of  contradictions  and  diffi- 
culties in  them ;  but  he  hints  no  suspicion  that  they  were 
forged.  Indeed,  he  admits  the  writings,  for  he  says,  '  These 
things,  then,  we  have  alleged  to  you  out  of  your  own  writ- 
ings, not  needing  any  other  weapons.'  In  Porphyry,  born 
A.D.  233  (the  most  sensible  and  severe  adversary  of  Christi- 
anity that  antiquity  can  produce),  we  find  no  trace  of  any 
suspicion  that  the  Christian  writings  were  not  authentic, 
though  he  pronounces  the  prophecy  of  Daniel  a  forgery. 
Porphyry  did  not  even  deny  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  history. 
He  admitted  that  the  miracles  were  performed  by  Christ, 
but  imputed  them  to  magic,  which  he  said  he  learned  in 
Egypt.  Julian,  commonly  called  the  Apostate,  flourished 
from  A.D.  331  to  363.  He  quotes  the  four  Gospels  and  the 
Acts,  and  nowhere  gives  any  intimation  that  he  suspected 
the  whole  or  an}^  part  of  them  to  be  forgeries. 

"Another  source  of  evidence  is  to  be  found  in  ancient  ver- 
sions and  manuscripts.  The  Syriac  version  was  probably 
made  early  in  the  second  century,  and  the  first  Latin  version 
almost  as  early.  Of  course  the  New  Testament  must  have 
existed,  and  been  received  as  the  standard  of  Christian  truth, 
before  these  versions  were  made.  Of  ancient  manuscripts 
containing  the  New  Testament  or  parts  thereof,  there  are 
several  thousands.  About  five  hundred  of  the  most  im- 
portant have  been  collated  with  great  care:  many  of  them 
are  of  great  antiquity.  The  Codex  Vaticanus  is  believed,  on 
very  satisfactory  evidence,  to  be  of  the  fourth  century,  and  the 
Codex  Alexandrianus  of  the  fifth, — perhaps  both  much  earlier. 
Thus  these  manuscripts  connect  with  manuscripts  com- 
pared by  Jerome  and  Eusebius,  a.d.  315-420,  who  prepared 
critical  editions  of  the  New  Testament  from  manuscripts  then 
ancient.  The  prodigious  number  of  these  manuscripts,  the 
distant  countries  whence  they  were  collected,  and  the  identity 
of  their  contents  with  the  quotations  of  the  fathers  of  diflereut 


SACRED    CANON.  48S 

ages,  place  the  New  Testament  incomparably  above  all  other 
ancient  works  in  point  of  authenticity. 

"  Is  there,  then,  we  are  ready  to  ask,  any  kind  of  external 
evidence  conceivable  which  is  wanting  to  our  sacred  books  ? 
But,  strong  as  is  the  external  proof,  it  hardly  equals  that 
which  is  to  be  derived  from  the  circumstances  of  the  case, 
and  from  internal  evidence.  For  if  these  writings  are  not 
authentic  they  must  be  forgeries  ;  and  they  are  of  such  a 
character,  and  purport  to  have  been  written  under  such  cir- 
cumstances, as  to  render  a  forgery  of  them  impossible.  Here, 
for  example,  are  no  fewer  than  nine  letters  which  claim  to 
have  been  written  to  numerous  bodies  of  men  and  received 
of  them ;  and  can  any  man  believe  that  such  letters,  often 
containing  severe  reproof,  could  have  been  received  and  read, 
as  we  know  these  were  by  the  early  Christians,  if  they  were 
forgeries?  Come,  now,  says  Tertullian,  born  only  sixty  years 
after  the  death  of  St.  John,  '  Come,  now,  who  wilt  exercise 
thy  curiosity  more  profitably  in  the  business  of  thy  salvation, 
run  through  the  apostolical  churches  in  which  the  very 
chairs  of  the  apostles  still  preside,  in  which  their  authentic 
letters  are  recited,  sounding  forth  the  voice  and  representing 
the  countenance  of  each.' 

"  Can  any  man  suppose  that  letters  thus  spoken  of  at  that 
early  age  could  be  forged?  Besides,  when  could  they  have 
been  forged  ?  Not,  certainly,  during  the  lives  of  the  apostles, 
for  then  they  would  have  confuted  them  ;  and  after  their 
death  it  is  morally  impossible  that  such  letters  should  have 
been  received  as  from  them  by  any  body  of  Christians." 

We  have  not  time  to  dwell  longer  upon  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  and  we  now  will  briefly  consider  the  Old.  In  the  first 
place,  Christ  and  the  apostles  indorsed  the  Jewish  canon,  as 
it  then  existed,  as  divine  Scripture ;  and  this  canon  was  the 
same  as  our  Old  Testament. 

"  I  was  daily  with  you,"  says  Christ  to  those  who  came  to 
apprehend  him,  "  in  the  temple,  teaching,  and  ye  took  me 
not;  but  the  Scripture  must  be  fulfilled."  "Think  not  that  I 
am  come  to  des^troy  the  low,  or  the  projyheis ;  I  am  not  come  to 


484  INTEGRITY  OF  THE 

destro}^,  but  to  fulfill."  "  These  are  the  words  which  I  spake 
unto  you  while  I  was  yet  with  you,  that  all  things  must  be 
fulfilled  which  were  written  in  the  hv)  of  3Ioses,  and  in  the 
jjrophets,  and  in  the  Psalms,  concerning  me."  "All  Scripture 
is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,"  says  Paul.  Thus,  in  the 
New  Testament,  the  apostles  indorse  all  the  Scriptures  in 
current  use  among  the  Jews.  The  Old  Testament  is  con- 
stantly appealed  to  as  the  ivord  of  God.  While,  also,  the 
Jewish  Scriptures  are  constantly  quoted,  there  is  no  intima- 
tion that  they  are  in  any  part  what  they  should  not  be.  The 
common  allusions  to  them  show  the  esteem  in  which  they 
are  held;  as,  "  Thus  saith  the  Scriptures  ;"  "  Thus  saith  the 
Lord ;"  "  As  the  Holy  Ghost  saith ;"  "  As  it  is  written."  Is, 
then,  the  Jewish  canon  the  same  as  our  Old  Testament? 
Consider  the  testimony  of  the  New  Testament.  In  the  New 
Testament  nearly  all  the  books  of  the  Old  are  alluded  to  or 
quoted.  Then,  again,  we  have  the  testimony  of  Jewish 
writers,  especially  of  Josephus,  born  about  a.d.  37,  a  few 
years  after  the  death  of  Christ.  In  his  treatise  defending  the 
authenticity  and  credibility  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures,  he 
says :  "  For  we  have  not  among  us  myriads  of  books,  dis- 
cordant and  conflicting,  but  only  twenty-two  books,  contain- 
ing the  history  of  all  past  time,  and  justly  believed  to  be 
divine.  Of  these,  five  belong  to  Moses,  which  contain  the 
laws,  and  the  traditions  of  the  origin  of  mankind  until  his 
death.  This  period  is  little  less  than  three  thousand  years. 
From  the  death  of  Moses  to  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  king 
of  the  Persians  after  Xerxes,  the  prophets  who  came  after 
Moses  recorded  the  events  of  their  times  in  thirteen  books. 
The  four  remaining  books  contain  hymns  to  God  and  rules 
of  life  for  man.  From  Artaxerxes  to  our  own  time,  every- 
thing has  been  written  ;  but  it  is  not  esteemed  of  equal  credit 
with  what  preceded,  because  there  has  not  been  an  exact 
succession  of  prophets.  And  it  is  evident  from  fact  how 
we  believe  in  our  Scriptures ;  for  through  so  long  a  period 
already  elapsed,  no  one  has  dared  to  add  anything,  or  take 
from  them,  or  to  make  alterations ;  but  it  is  implanted  in  all 


SACRED    CANON.  485 

Jews,  from  their  very  birth,  to  consider  them  oracles  of  God 
{^9£di  duyij-ara)^  and  to  abide  by  them,  and  for  them,  if  need  be, 
cheerfully  to  die."  The  testimony  also  of  the  early  Christian 
fathers  conclusively  shows  that  the  Jewish  canon,  as  indorsed 
by  Christ  and  the  apostles,  was  precisely  the  same  as  that  of 
our  Old  Testament.  Consider,  also,  the  great  fact  that  from 
the  time  of  Christ  to  the  present  day  Christians  as  well  as 
Jews  have  held  in  equal  veneration  the  Old  Testament.  In 
respect  to  the  preservation  of  the  text  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  we  cannot  do  better  than  quote  the  language  of 
Professor  Sampson,  of  Virginia : 

"  I  return,  then,  to  the  affirmation  that  of  no  books  so 
ancient  has  the  text  been  so  certainly  and  so  well  preserved 
as  that  of  the  books  which  compose  our  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments. There  are,  indeed,  here  and  there  passages,  and  still 
ofteuer  clauses,  the  integrity  of  which  there  may  be  some  good 
reason  to  suspect;  and  there  are  hundreds  and  thousands  of 
minor  variations  brought  to  light  by  a  careful  comparison  of 
manuscripts,  versions,  and  quotations.  But  of  these  the 
great  majority  do  not  afl'ect  the  sense  in  the  least,  and  could 
not,  therefore,  be  expressed  in  a  good  translation ;  and 
Where  they  do,  either  a  judicious  criticism  can  determine  the 
true  reading,  or  it  is  unimportant  to  the  Christian  system, 
and  generally  to  the  passage  itself,  which  of  several  readings, 
that  may  be  about  equally  sustained,  shall  be  adopted  as 
original.  The  very  means  of  multiplying  the  various  read- 
ings, viz.  the  great  number  of  documents  to  be  compared, 
have  always  furnished  so  many  eft'ectual  guards  to  prevent 
corruption  of  the  text,  and  furnish  now  ample  means  of  cor- 
recting it,  where  correction  is  needed.  It  is  precisely  those 
books,  classic  as  well  as  sacred,  of  which  we  have  fewest 
manuscripts  and  other  documents,  and,  consequently,  com- 
paratively few  various  readings,  that  the  text  is  most  liable 
to  suspicion.  On  the  other  hand,  the  text  of  those  is  most 
certain  for  which  we  have  the  greatest  number  of  documents, 
especially  manuscripts,  to  compare,  and,  consequently,  the 
greatest   number   of  various    readings    actually    occurring. 


486  INTEGRITY  OF   THE  SACRED    CANON. 

Thus  has  Providence  by  natural  means,  and  without  a 
miracle,  preserved  the  text  of  all  the  Sacred  Scriptures  ;  and 
it  is  vain  for  skepticism  longer  to  hope  to  find  a  cover  for  its 
unbelief  under  the  flimsy  pretext  of  its  corruption, — either 
accidental  or  designed.  The  worst  text  that  could  be  pub- 
lished on  the  authority  of  any  manuscripts  would  not  alter 
a  single  phase  of  Christianity." 

Can  we,  then,  question  the  integrity  of  the  sacred  canon, 
or  the  truth  of  the  words  of  inspiration,  "  I,  Jesus,  have 
sent  mine  angel  to  testify  unto  you  these  things  in  the 
churches"  ? 


CHAPTER   XVIII. 

THE    PLENARY    INSPIRATION    OF    THE    BIBLE. 

"When,  in  addition  to  prophecies  and  miracles,  we  have  in 
the  Scriptures  a  most  wonderful  adaptation  to  our  wants; 
when  we  see  in  thom  the  exhibition  of  truths  far  more  clear 
than  the  light  of  nature  can  make  known,  and  the  revelation 
of  new  and  most  important  truths  that  no  uninspired  mind 
could  discover ;  when,  looking  at  the  character  of  Christ,  we 
see  a  perfect  model  of  all  virtue,  as  well  as  the  only  possible 
medium  of  salvation  for  sinners,  and  then  consider  the  suc- 
cess of  Christianity  under  circumstances  that  would  crush  it,« 
if  not  divine,  the  conclusion  is  irresistible  that  the  whole 
system  of  religion  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament is  of  God,  and  not  of  human  origin. 

The  inspiration  of  the  Bible  does  not  rest  upon  the  fact 
alone  of  the  assertion  of  the  sacred  writers  to  their  inspira- 
tion. While  this  assertion  is  an  additional  argument  to  prove 
the  Bible  from  God,  it  yet  forms  but  one  link  of  a  mighty 
chain  that  binds  the  whole  together.  Until  the  other  evidences 
have  been  disproved,  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  a  reason  for 
the  assertion  that  the  Bible  is  not  of  God.  With  the  exist- 
ence of  the  great  facts  of  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible,  mira- 
cles, prophecies,  the  divine  excellence  of  Christ's  character, 
and  the  success  of  Christianity,  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  as 
revealing  a  system  of  religion  from  God,  rests  upon  an  im- 
movable foundation :  that  authority  is  infallible,  and  therefore 
not  of  human  origin. 

But  the  general  inspiration  of  the  Bible  is  not  to  be 
confounded  with  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible.  The 
former  has  already  been  shown.  If  nothing  more  was  done, 
this  would  be  enough  to  authorize  us  to  receive  tlie  Bible  as 

(48T) 


THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

the  word  of  God,  and  to  submit  to  the  Christian  religion 
with  all  its  truths  as  alike  infallible  and  divine.  With  the 
general  inspiration  of  the  Bible  it  is  perfectly  consistent  that 
there  may  exist  some  errors  of  history  or  science,  some  mis- 
takes of  dates  or  persons  or  representations  of  physical  phe- 
nomena, or  even  some  deficiencies  of  moral  truths.  We  do 
not  think  these  things  actually  to  exist  in  the  Bible  ;  but  sup- 
pose they  do?  Suppose,  for  reasons  best  known  to  God,  he 
should  permit  a  record  defective  in  some  respects  to  be  given 
to  man  :  does  that  prove  the  whole  defective  ?  Are  miracles, 
prophecies,  the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  our  wants,  the  di- 
vine virtues  of  Christ,  and  the  success  of  Christianity,  all  to 
count  for  nothing  because  of  such  deficiencies  ?  Must  we 
throw  away  the  Bible  because  of  some  imperfections  ?  Must 
we  disown  in  the  main  the  divine  authority  of  the  Scriptures 
because  it  does  not  extend  to  every  chapter  and  verse?  Here 
infidelity,  upon  its  own  ground,  may  be  shown  to  be  baseless 
and  unworthy  of  confidence.  Even  should  we  go  so  far  as  to 
admit  that  a  very  large  part  of  the  Bible  was  not  inspired, 
this  would  not  prove  the  whole  Bible  uninspired.  If  the  ob- 
jections of  infidelity  were  conceded  as  to  many  things  recorded 
as  facts,  yet  this  would  not  do  away  with  the  evidence  of 
miracles  and  prophecy;  this  would  not  subvert  the  proof  of 
the  divine  mission  of  Christ ;  this  would  not  do  away  with 
the  adaptation  of  the  Bible  to  our  wants  We  assert  that, 
taking  the  lowest  ground,  admitting  even  a  thousand  mis- 
takes, and  confessing  to  great  error  upon  much  that  is  of  im- 
portance to  believe  in  the  Scriptures,  enough  would  still 
remain  to  prove  that  the  Bible  in  all  essential  respects  is  of 
God,  and  bears  the  impress  of  a  higher  than  human  authority. 
God  has  not  placed  his  word  upon  such  precarious  ground 
that  it  will  be  subverted,  or  proved  not  divine,  unless  every- 
thing claimed  for  it  is  established.  ITot  one  angel,  but  a 
thousand,  guard  its  divine  authority ;  and  before  that  author- 
ity can  be  destroyed  it  is  necessary  that  the  whole  angelic 
band  that  stand  sentinel  over  their  sacred  trust  should  be  dis- 
armed. We  believe  that  no  idea  is  more  fallacious  than  the 
assertion  that  one,  or  two,  or  twenty,  or  a  hundred  errors  in 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  489 

the  Holy  Scriptures  would  conclusively  show  that  the  Bible 
was  not  divine  and  that  God  had  nothing  to  do  with  its  com- 
position. These  ei-rors  would,  indeed,  be  clear  objections  to 
the  divine  authority  of  those  parts  of  the  Bible  where  thej^ 
existed  ;  for  God  is  the  author  only  of  truth;  but  they  could 
not  form  a  valid  argument  for  the  rejection  of  the  whole  Bible 
as  from  God,  and  for  the  assertion  that  it  had  but  one  ele- 
ment, even  the  human,  and  therefore  must  stand  upon  the 
same  ground  as  all  other  works.  Consequently,  we  say  that, 
under  the  most  unfavorable  admissions,  even  upon  the  very 
low  ground  that  some  delight  to  stand  upon,  it  cannot  be 
shown  that  the  Bible  has  not  general  inspiration,  that  Chris- 
tianity as  a  system  is  not  divine,  that  the  Old  and  Kew  Tes- 
taments do  not,  in  their  essential  features,  bear  the  impress 
of  God,  and  that  there  is  not  a  high  sense  in  which  the  Bible 
diifers  from  all  other  books,  giving  to  it  a  supreme  authority 
that  would  not  be  applicable  to  any  human  production. 

We  claim  for  the  Bible  a  general  inspiration,  if  nothing 
more.  AYe  say  that  even  if  that  inspiration  was  made  in  a  high 
degree  defective,  yet  the  Bible  would  stand  upon  a  foundation 
altogether  different  from  all  other  books  ;  that  enough  would 
still  remain  in  it  to  make  tlie  Holy  Scriptures  w^orthy  of  the 
highest  respect  and  deserving  the  most  considerate  attention 
and  love.  So  long  as  the  grand  central  truth  stands  out,  of 
Christ,  the  Messiah,  sent  by  God, — so  long  as  any  one  undis- 
puted miracle  of  his  can  be  proved,  or  a  single  prediction 
that  carries  with  it  the  impress  of  a  divine  mind, — then,  upon 
the  simple  authority  of  but  one  miracle  and  but  one  predic- 
tion, we  claim  for  the  Bible  enough  of  inspiration  to  make  it 
w^orthy  of  confidence,  when  upon  the  side  of  this  miracle 
and  prophecy  there  is  the  conclusive  test  of  adaptation  and 
approimateness  to  our  wants  as  sinners.  But,  in  claiming  at 
least  for  the  Bible  a  general  inspiration,  we  would  be  under- 
stood clearly  to  deny  that  there  is  any  necessity  for  taking 
the  low  ground  supposed,  or  that  general  inspiration  does  not 
comprehend  vastly  more  than  this.  Our  object  is  onlj-  to 
show  that  there  is  no  reason  in  the  arsrument  that  one  or 
many  errors,  even  if  established,  would  prove  the  Bible  not 


490  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

from  God.  These  errors  would  be  defects,  but  not  reasons 
for  an  absolute  rejection  of  the  Bible.  We  might  wish  the 
Bible  free  from  them,  but  their  existence  would  not  show  that 
no  parts  of  the  Bible  were  from  God.  It  must  ever  be  remem- 
bered that  objections  against  the  Bible  must  be  proved  before 
they  can  have  any  weight,  and  that  those  who  would  under- 
mine its  divine  authority  must  have  something  better  than 
assertion.  When  the  general  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures 
is  shown,  be  it  of  a  high  or  low  character,  enough  will  always 
remain  to  show  the  divinity  of  its  origin;  and  this,  con- 
sidered simply  as  a  fact  established,  must  ever  bring  with  it 
the  deepest  claim  upon  our  homage  and  respect. 

But  we  enter  now  upon  the  subject  of  the  plenary  ivsivration 
of  the  Bible.  This  is  a  step  higher  than  the  general  inspiration 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Plenary  inspiration  includes 
all  that  general  inspiration  does;  it  differs  only  in  that  it  is  a 
more  perfect  kind  of  inspiration.  The  Bible  is  generally  in- 
spired if  it  shows  conclusively  the  divine  authority  of  the 
Christian  religion,  and  all  the  essential  facts  relating  to  that 
religion.  It  is  generally  inspired  if  the  writers  of  tlie  Bible 
were  under  such  an  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  enable 
them  to  communicate  the  great  facts  of  the  Bible  as  infallible 
truths,  with  the  sanction  of  God  as  to  their  reality  and  their 
binding  obligation.  Inspiration  rests  not  so  much  upon  the 
truth  of  the  Bible, — other  books  are  as  true, — as  upon  the 
fact  that  those  books  proceed  from  God,  are  enforced  by  his 
authority,  and  are  required  to  be  believed  in  by  divine  sanc- 
tions. The  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible  comprises  all 
this ;  but  its  peculiar  distinction  from  general  inspiration 
consists  in  the  fact  that  plenary  inspiration  has  allusion  to 
the  mind  especially  of  the  writer.  Plenary  inspiration  has 
reference  to  the  precise  language  of  the  writing  itself.  As 
language  is  made  up  of  words,  and  the  best  mode  of  inspira- 
tion must  be  the  expression  in  the  original  manuscripts  of  the 
exact  words  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  consequently  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, if  plenarily  inspired,  must  embody  the  selection  of  the 
best  kind  of  language  to  accomplish  the  precise  end  of  every 
book  in  the  word  of  God.    But  what  is  the  best  kind  of  han- 


OF   THE  BIBLE.  491 

guage  to  communicate  the  mind  of  God  to  man,  unless  it  be 
language  embodying  the  very  words  of  the  Holy  Spirit? 
This  is  in  no  respect  inconsistent  with  the  great  idea  that  the 
Bible  has  in  it  largely  a  human  element  as  well  as  a  divine 
element.  The  Bible  was  made  for  man  ;  it  must,  therefore, 
have  in  it  the  human  as  well  as  the  divine,  and  both  elements 
blended  together.  The  divine  element  must  exist  to  show 
its  infallible  authority ;  the  human  element,  to  adapt  it  to  the 
endless  conditions  of  human  wants.  Without  the  one,  it 
would  not  be  from  God ;  without  the  other,  it  might  do  for 
angels,  but  not  for  mankind.  Now,  whenever  the  plenary 
inspiration  of  the  Bible  is  spoken  of,  we  would  be  under- 
stood to  mean  simply  that  the  minds  of  the  writers  of  the 
Bible  were  under  such  guidance  or  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  to  give  in  human  language,  in  a  way  the  most  ap- 
propriate under  the  circumstances,  the  mind  of  God,  his 
thoughts  or  will.  Thus,  while  the  human  element  is  made 
use  of,  it  is  under  such  control  as  to  secure  also  the  divine 
element.  The  human  element,  in  all  its  numberless  modes 
of  expression,  is  employed,  while  the  divine  element,  as  a 
restraining  and  regulating  power,  exists  to  give  those  sanc- 
tions that  should  exalt  the  Bible  above  all  other  books.  I^^ow, 
to  speak  of  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  with  the 
mind  alone  of  the  writers  inspired  in  different  degrees,  and 
yet  no  direct  superintendence  in  respect  to  their  choice  of 
language, — no  such  inspiration  as  to  lead  in  all  cases  to  the 
selection  of  the  best  words,  words  the  most  appropriate, 
concise,  and  adapted  to  the  ideas  that  are  communicated, — 
is  in  no  respect  to  come  up  to  the  full  meaning  of  plenary 
inspiration. 

It  is  evident  that  the  best  kind  of  inspiration  must  have 
relation  not  only  to  the  substance  of  truth,  but  also  to  its  mode. 
There  must  be  some  regard  to  the  dress  of  truth,  as  well  as  to 
the  body  of  it.  Ideas,  to  have  their  most  appropriate  mean- 
ing, must  be  embodied  in  appropriate  words.  Language  must 
lose  much  of  its  power  unless  there  is  due  regard  to  suitable 
expression.  This  is  what  we  claim  for  plenary  inspiration.  It 
is  simply  divine  truth  clothed  in  suitable  words,  and  in  that 


492  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

very  langaage  most  appropriate  to  convey  the  mind  of  God. 
By  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible  it  is  not  meant  that 
no  verbal  inaccuracies  may  not  have  crept  into  the  transla- 
tions of  the  Bible  from  the  original  copy :  we  do  not  hold 
that  the  translators  of  the  Bible  were  inspired,  because  that 
is  not  necessary  in  a  translation;  a  heathen  as  well  as  a 
Christian  may  translate  from  one  language  to  another ;  but 
what  is  meant  is  that  the  very  language  of  the  original 
manuscripts  of  the  Bible,  as  much  as  the  thoughts  of  the 
writers,  was  under  the  direct  superintendence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  so  that  the  writers  of  the  Bible  were  truly  the  aman- 
uenses of  the  Holy  Spirit,  presenting  his  thoughts  with  the 
best  selection  of  words.  But  should  it  be  said  that  this 
would  exclude  the  human  element  and  leave  only  the  divine, 
in  reply  we  say,  this  does  not  follow  if  the  Holy  Spirit 
makes  use  of  the  idiosyncrasy  of  the  different  writers  of  the 
Bible,  and  permits  each  to  express  himself  after  his  own 
peculiar  constitution  and  in  accordance  with  the  varying  con- 
ditions of  the  human  mind.  The  essential  thing  is  to  avoid 
error,  and  express  truth  in  the  best  manner ;  this  may  in 
the  wisest  manner  be  attained  by  leaving  each  -writer  to 
speak  in  his  own  way,  and  in  harmony  with  the  nature 
.God  has  given  him,  and  the  circumstances  in  which  he  is 
placed. 

Our  idea  of  plenary  inspiration  is  simply  that  God  com- 
municates his  mind  in  the  best  way  for  mankind.  Now,  the 
question  is.  Does  plenary  inspiration  discard  the  human  ele- 
ment? Not  at  all.  It  makes  use  of  it  intimately  blended  or 
pervaded  by  the  divine  element.  Thus,  the  human  element 
is  that  which  makes  a  revelation  adapted  to  man  in  sympathy 
with  man, — something  permitted  to  man  in  accordance  with 
the  endless  diversities  of  his  condition  in  this  world ;  while  the 
divine  element  preserves  from  error,  and  gives  the  sanction  of 
God  to  the  truth.  We  hold  that  all  this  is  perfectly  consistent 
with  plenary  inspiration.  It  is  not  that  God  speaks  alone,  or 
that  man  speaks  alone,  but  that  God,  through  his  all-per- 
vading and  controlling  Spirit,  makes  use  of  the  idiosyncrasy  of 
each  writer,  while  he  preserves  that  idiosyncrasy  from  error, 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  493 

and  leads  it  to  the  expression  of  such  ideas  in  such  a  way 
as  best  to  secure  the  end  of  a  suitable  revelation  of  his  will 
and  thoughts  to  man.  God  gives  a  Bible  not  to  angels,  but 
to  mankind ;  and  therefore  all  his  communications  to  men 
must  be  in  accordance  with  their  peculiar  wants  and  circum- 
stances. Thus  the  human  element  and  the  divine  are  made 
to  blend  together  in  this  respect,  that  God  condescends  to 
the  limited  capacities  of  man  in  such  away  as  to  communicate 
his  mind  as  best  it  may  be  understood  within  the  sphere  of  the 
human,  while  the  human  is  so  guided  as  to  be  kept  from  error, 
and  80  enlightened  as  to  declare  such  truths  as  most  truly 
will  secure  the  great  end  of  human  redemption.  How,  then, 
is  plenary  inspiration  inconsistent  with  the  fullest  admission 
of  the  human  element  in  the  Bible  ?  There  is  no  more  diffi- 
culty in  God's  consulting  the  mode  of  truth  than  in  his  con- 
sulting the  substance  of  truth,  and  no  more  inappropriate- 
ness  in  his  prescribing  the  manner  of  revelation  than  in  his 
prescribing  the  essences.  Rather  we  should  infer  that  God 
would  have  respect  not  only  to  his  word,  but  to  the  way 
of  its  communication;  and  this  is  just  what  we  mean  by 
plenary  inspiration.  Will,  then,  any  one  say  that  because 
God  makes  use  of  the  peculiar  idiosyncrasy  of  each  writer 
of  the  Bible,  the  Bible  is  therefore  not  plenarily  inspired  ? 
We  do  not  see  liow  both  the  human  and  the  divine  elements 
combine ;  but  do  we  not  see  the  fact  itself?  Do  we  not  see 
that  God  speaks  to  us  not  in  angelic  but  in  human  language, 
and  therefore  must  accommodate  himself  to  the  essential 
limitation  and  even  imperfection  of  human  language  ?  God 
comes  with  just  as  much  truth  in  the  different  conditions  of 
our  earthly  existence  as  we  can  most  suitably  comprehend, 
and  at  the  same  time  with  just  that  truth  which  most  wisely 
in  all  ages  will  secure  the  great  end  of  human  redemption. 
We  think  a  singular  want  of  consideration  has  been  shown 
in  accounting  for  this  peculiarity  of  the  revelation  of  God's 
mind  to  man.  That  which  is  the  highest  excellence  of 
the  Bible  is  interpreted  into  the  denial  of  its  plenary  inspi- 
ration ;  and  because  the  human  element  is  admitted  we  are 
told  that  the  divine  element  is  either  unnecessary  or  impossi- 


494  THE  PLENABY  INSPIRATION 

ble.  But  how  does  this  follow  ?  The  divine  element  is  in- 
dispensable to  keep  from  error,  and  equally  essential  to  se- 
cure the  best  mode  of  presenting  truth.  Why  may  not  both 
be  made  use  of  in  perfect  consistency  with  the  proper  devel- 
opment of  the  human  element  ?  We  think  the  most  dan- 
gerous heresy  of  the  present  day  in  relation  to  inspiration 
is  found  in  the  assertion  that  if  God  speaks  man  cannot 
speak,  and  if  man  speaks  God  cannot  speak, — in  other  words, 
the  denial  of  the  blending  of  the  human  and  the  divine  ele- 
ments in  inspiration.  It  is  this  very  union  of  both  that  makes 
the  Bible  the  noblest,  the  best  and  most  useful  of  all  books, 
and  gives  to  it  in  all  conditions  of  life  the  authority  of  God. 

There  are  three  forms  of  error  into  which  the  mind  falls 
in  relation  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible, — those  of  infidelity, 
of  pantheism,  and  of  superstition.  Infidelit}'  denies  the  divine 
element  in  the  Bible  altogether;  pantheism  makes  all  in  the 
Bible  an  emanation  from  God  alone,  in  common  with  every- 
thing else;  while  superstition  misapplies  the  human  and  the 
divine  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  so  as  to  degrade  both.  The 
infidel  sees  no  God  in  the  Bible ;  the  pantheist  sees  no  man  ; 
while  the  superstitious  sees  neither  God  nor  man,  in  the  sense 
in  which  both  are  delineated  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures. 

After  the  general  inspiration  of  the  Bible  is  show^n,  but 
two  things  are  needful  to  be  established  in  order  to  show  the 
plenary  or  the  best  possible  kind  of  inspiration.  ISTo  person 
can  doubt  that  if  there  runs  through  the  Bible  a  great  chain 
of  prophecy, — if  there  are  scattered  all  over  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  predictions  fulfilled  and  unfulfilled, — then  the 
writers  of  the  Bible  must  be  under  a  general  inspiration  of 
God ;  for  they  certainly  could  not  foretell,  hundreds  of  years 
before  accomplisliment,  events  to  take  place  Prophecy  of 
itself  shows  inspiration  ;  and  now  if,  in  connection  with  this, 
a  most  wonderful  adaptation  to  human  wants  is  seen  in  the 
Bible,  and  truths  are  declared  which  were  never  known 
before,  or  which  were  universally  forgotten  or  perverted  if 
ever  known,  then  the  reason  is  more  conclusive  still  for 
concluding  that  the  Scriptures  are  generally  inspired.  What 
man  cannot   do   must,  if  done,  be  accomplished   by  God; 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  495 

aud  we  have  only  to  notice  in  the  Bible  that  which  man  can- 
not do,  thrown  alone  upon  his  own  resources,  to  find  an  irre- 
sistible argument  for  the  general  inspiration  of  the  Bible. 
This  general  inspiration  is  not  destroj'ed  because  of  errors  dis- 
covered in  history,  oi'' science,  or  even  ethical  statements.  It 
is  not  destroyed  if  much  can  be  shown  in  the  Bible  that  is  use- 
less, or  inappropriate,  or  inconsistent  with  othler  portions  of  the 
Scriptures;  for,  remember,  miracles,  prophecy,  adaptation, 
success  of  Christianity  in  the  first  century,  and  the  perfect 
character  of  Christ,  must  each  and  all  be  shown  false  before 
with  clear  argument  a  person  can  say  that  in  no  sense  is  the 
Bible  inspired  or  the  work  of  God.  What  a  hopeless  task  has 
the  infidel,  then,  before  him  !  This  fivefold  rope  of  strength 
ties  the  Bible  together.  Not  one  strand,  but  all,  must  be  cut 
before  any  valid  excuse  can  be  given  for  the  rejection  of  the 
Scriptures.  How  preposterous,  then,  the  conduct  of  those 
who  think,  feel,  and  act  as  if  the  Bible  was  proved  to  be  only 
of  human  origin,  because  they  believe  some  objection  has 
been  sustained  against  the  Scriptures !  They  might  as  well 
deny  the  existence  of  the  sun  because  of  some  spots  on  its 
surface,  or  that  of  the  moon  because  it  is  partially  obscured 
by  the  clouds. 

We  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  the  general  inspiration  of 
the  Bible  rests  upon  a  foundation  of  granite  as  firm  as  the 
everlasting  hills, — a  foundation  even  more  strong  and  endur- 
ing, since  the  earth  itself  shall  pass  away.  Infidelity,  then, 
under  the  most  favorable  admissions,  can  accomplish  nothing 
against  it ;  and,  consequently,  there  is  an  all-sufiicient  ground 
for  loving  and  receiving  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God,  if  it 
is  only  generally  inspired.  The  diamonds  and  pearls  in  an 
earthen  vessel  are  none  the  less  diamonds  and  pearls  because 
of  the  rubbish  that  may  be  mixed  up  with  them;  and,  if  it 
would  be  insanity  to  reject  the  treasures  because  of  the  rub- 
bish, has  infidelity  anything  to  boast  of  because  it  thinks  it 
can  show  valid  objections  or  errors  in  the  Bible  ? 

We  are  convinced  that  not  only  the  general  inspiration  of 
the  Bible  can  be  shown,  but  that  we  can  even  take  a  higher 
step,  and  prove  it  plenary  inspiration,  in  the  true  sense  of 
this  language. 


496  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

"What,  then,  is  necessary  to  prove  the  plenary  inspiration 
of  the  Bible  ?  After  the  general  inspiration  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  shown,  but  two  things  are  needful  to  be  established, 
to  show  the  plenarj'  or  best  kind  of  inspiration. 

1st.  That  no  errors  in  history,  science,  or  ethical  truths 
exist  in  the  Bible. 

2d.  That  the  inspiration  of  all  the  Scriptures  be  asserted  in 
the  Bible  in  such  a  manner  as  to  show  their  plenary  inspira- 
tion. 

The  first  proposition  has  nothing  to  do  with  variations  of 
language,  or  those  slight  discrepancies  of  words  that  arise 
from  different  copies.  The  Bible  does  not  attempt  to  father 
the  mistakes  of  copyists  or  the  different  interpretations  of  its 
readers.  If,  according  to  the  well-established  laws  of  popular 
language,  no  error  can  be  shown  in  the  Bible,  then  it  is 
conclusively  proved  to  be  free  from  all  scientific,  historical,  or 
ethical  untruths.  What  erroneous  statement  is  there  in  the 
Bible?  If  one  can  be  shown,  then,  so  far  as  that  statement  is 
concerned,  the  Bible  in  that  portion  is  not  inspired,  for  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  not  the  author  of  error,  but  of  truth  ;  but  even 
this  admitted,  and  the  general  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  is 
not  touched.  But  it  can  with  confidence  be  said  that  no 
such  statement  can  be  shown.  The  skeptic  cannot  laj^  his  hand 
upon  a  single  error  in  the  word  of  God.  Often  has  it  been 
tried,  and  as  often  has  it  been  found  that  the  mistake  ex- 
isted in  the  mind  of  the  objector,  and  not  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. 

The  more  careful  the  investigations  into  the  field  of  science, 
and  the  more  clear  the  classification  of  the  facts  of  history, 
the  deeper  has  been  found  the  harmony  of  science  and  pro- 
fane history  with  the  Bible.  While  the  Bible  comes  to 
us  with  the  main  object  of  teaching  moral  truth,  it  has 
never  asserted  a  single  thing  inconsistent  with  any  truth 
made  known  in  science  or  with  any  fact  of  history.  That 
the  Bible  does  not  profess  to  give  us  a  treatise  upon  geology, 
or  astronomy,  or  chemistry,  so  far  from  being  a  blemish, 
is  a  great  excellence.  It  has  higher  objects  to  accomplish 
than  to  waste  time  upon  subjects  that  are  connected  only 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  497 

with  the  intellect  and  of  no  immediate  use  to  advance  the 
end  of  revelation. 

Consider  the  second  proposition.  Is  the  plenary  inspira- 
tion of  the  Bible  asserted  in  the  word  of  God  ? 

Plenary  inspiration  has  alread}^  been  defined  to  be  such  a 
superintendence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  reach  to  the  lan- 
guage of  the  writers  of  the  Bible,  and  consequently  as  includ- 
ing the  choice  of  the  most  appropriate  words  that  embody  in 
the  best  phraseology  the  natural  characteristics  of  the  writer. 
What  constitutes  plenary  inspiration  is  far  more  the  condition 
of  the  writing  than  of  the  writer.  The  mind  of  the  writer  may 
be  in  different  states  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
or  that  mind  may  be  left  to  write  man}-  things  in  the  natural 
state,  under  no  particular  excitement  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
What  constitutes  plenary  inspiration  is  simply  that  the 
thoughts  and  language  of  the  writer  should  be  pre- 
cisely such  as  the  Holy  Spirit  would  compose  if  left  to  write 
the  Bible  without  the  aid  of  human  instrumentality.  The 
confusion  that  rests  upon  this  subject  is  cleared  away  if  we 
distinguish  between  the  Scriptures  and  the  human  instru- 
mentality that  composed  them.  Plenary  inspiration  has 
reference  to  the  Scriptures  themselves,  rather  than  to  the 
writers  of  them.  The  end  to  be  secured  was  the  composing 
of  certain  events  in  history  and  certain  great  moral  truths  in 
such  a  variety  as  to  be  adapted  to  every  class  of  mind  and  every 
human  want.  To  accomplish  that  end,  human  instruments 
were  made  use  of;  as  to  the  mode  of  the  divine  influence  upon 
the  mind,  this  is  a  matter  that  it  does  not  concern  us  to  inves- 
tigate. The  inspiration  was  such  as  to  be  adequate  for  the  task 
to  be  performed;  and  that  task  was  the  composing  of  truths 
without  error,  facts  without  needless  redundance,  events  with 
conciseness,  and  all  things  suitable  to  know  best  adapted  for 
the  age  in  which  they  were  written,  and  for  subsequent  ages, 
under  the  direct  supervision  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  that  no 
human  imperfections  should  mar  the  writings  or  human  mis- 
take destroy  their  divine  authority  in  any  respect.  But  the 
same  infinite  wisdom  that  made  use  of  men,  and  not  angels, 
to   compose   the  Scriptures,  to    secure  their  highest   adap- 

32 


498  THE  PLENABY  INSPIRATION 

tation,  selected  different  writers  in  different  ages,  who  should 
embody  in  writing  enough  of  the  peculiarities  of  the  age  in 
which  they  lived  to  mark  the  period  when  they  were  written, 
and  at  the  same  time  enough  of  the  peculiarities  of  the 
writers  not  to  weaken  the  evidence  of  their  individuality. . 

The  differences  of  style,  the  singular  diversity  of  expression, 
so  often  objected  to  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  is 
the  highest  evidence  of  that  inspiration.  This  diversity  of 
style,  these  numerous  writers,  with  all  their  peculiarities  of 
thought  and  expression,  give  an  individuality  to  the  Bible 
infinitely  superior  to  one  dead  level  of  style  and  expression. 
The  Holy  Spirit  made  use  of  such  a  variety  of  instruments 
to  make  their  writings  adapted  to  the  diversities  of  every 
age,  the  peculiarities  of  every  land,  and  every  condition  of 
life.  Thus,  as  the  divinity  of  Christ  became  incarnated  in 
his  humanity  to  give  a  more  perfect  illustration  of  virtue 
and  secure  the  redemption  of  man,  so  the  mind  of  God  may 
be  said  to  be  incarnated  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  through  the 
use  of  human  instrumentality  in  their  composition,  and  the 
embodying,  in  perfect  consistency  with  divine  truth,  all  the 
endless  diversities  of  human  thought  and  feeling  and  action. 
And  yet  one  of  the  highest  internal  evidences  of  inspiration 
is  made  use  of  by  many  to  disprove  altogether  the  plenary 
inspiration  of  the  Bible ;  as  if  God,  who  condescended  so 
much  to  human  wants  as  to  suffer  his  Son  to  assume  hu- 
manity and  die  upon  the  cross,  could  not  make  use  of  all  the 
diversity  of  human  instrumentality  without  destroying  the 
divine  authority  of  his  word.  It  is  sometimes  said  that  the 
plenar}'  inspiration  of  the  Bible  is  unnecessary,  provided  the 
mind  was  inspired  in  respect  to  the  thoughts,  and  that  the 
writers  of  the  Scriptures  were  left  alone  to  their  own  judg- 
ment and  fidelity.  But  an  inspiration  that  had  no  reference 
to  the  manner,  the  peculiar  selection  of  the  right  language 
or  words,  would  not  be  sufficient  to  guard  against  all  redun- 
dancy, all  improprieties  of  expression,  and  all  mistakes.  With- 
out such  an  inspiration  as  directly  to  affect  the  language  or 
secure  the  right  selection  of  words,  essential  error  might  be 
communicated,  and  mistakes  be  made,  through  the  too  great 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  499 

liberty  of  the  writers.  How  without  a  plenary  inspiration 
could  such  an  inimitable  conciseness  be  manifested  as  is  seen 
in  the  Bible,  embodying  such  an  immense  variety  of  truths, 
through  so  many  centuries,  in  a  space  so  small  ?  How  could 
there  be  a  perfect  assurance  that  all  the  Bible  is  the  word  of 
God,  or  that  man  is  not  by  his  own  authority  speaking  to  us 
rather  than  God  himself,  and  therefore  we  must  pronounce 
an  opinion  from  a  human  rather  than  a  divine  source  ?  Con- 
sider directly  the  evidence  of  the  Scriptures  upon  this  sub- 
ject. When  Christ,  in  Luke,  speaks  of  the  persecutions  the 
apostles  should  experience  after  his  death,  he  declares  to 
them,  "  For  I  will  give  you  a  mouth  and  a  wisdom  which  all 
your  adversaries  shall  not  be  able  to  gainsay  or  resist."  In 
John  he  declares,  "  The  Comforter,  which  is  the  Holy  Ghost, 
whom  the  Father  will  send  in  my  name,  he  shall  teach  you 
all  things,  and  bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance  what- 
soever I  have  said  unto  you."  The  claim  to  inspiration  is 
clearly  made  by  the  apostles  in  those  passages  where  they 
place  their  own  writings  upon  the  same  footing  with  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament.  For  St.  Paul,  speaking  of  the 
Holy  Scrii')tures, — a  common  expression  among  the  Jews, — in 
which  Timothy  had  been  instructed  from  his  childhood,  says, 
"  All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God  ;"  thus  includ- 
ing the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  St.  Peter,  speaking  of  the 
ancient  prophets,  says,  "  The  Spirit  of  Christ  was  in  them," 
and  "  The  prophecy  came  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man  ; 
but  holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost."  The  quotations  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles  from 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  often  introduced  with 
the  expression  in  which  their  inspiration  is  directly  asserted. 
"  Thus  spake  the  Holy  Ghost  by  Esaias  ;"  "  By  the  mouth  of 
thy  servant  David  thou  hast  said."  And  St.  Peter  charges  the 
Christians,  "  Be  mindful  of  the  words  which  were  spoken  be- 
fore by  the  holy  prophets,  and  of  the  commandments  Of  us  the 
apostles."  In  the  book  of  Revelation  we  read  of  the  per- 
sonal inspiration  of  John  in  the  words,  "Jesus  sent  and 
signified  by  his  angel  to  his  servant  John  the  things  that 
were  to  come  to  pass."     Paul  to  the  Corinthians  thus  ex- 


500  THE  PLENABY  INSPIRATION 

presses  himself:  "  AYliicli  things  we  speak  not  in  the  words 
which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
teacheth."  Storr  and  Flatt  give  the  following  interpretation 
to  this  text :  "  Paul,"  they  say,  "  asserts  that  the  doctrines 
of  Christianity  were  revealed  to  him  by  the  almighty  agency 
of  God  himself;  and,  finally,  that  the  inspiration  of  the  Di- 
vine Spirit  extended  even  to  his  words,  and  to  all  his  ex- 
hibitions of  revealed  truths."  They  add  that  "St.  Paul 
clearly  distinguishes  between  the  doctrine  itself  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  is  communicated."  St.  Peter  tells  us 
that  he  wrote  all  his  letters  not  only  with  the  words  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth,  but  also,  as  were  the  other  scnptures 
(of  the  Old  Testament),  according  to  the  wisdom  given  unto 
him.  All  the  Scriptures  are  also  indiscriminately  called 
the  icoi^d  of  God;  not  only  is  the  entire  Bible  called  the 
ivord  of  God,  but  without  distinction  it  is  called  the  oracles 
of  God.  What  word  more  expressive  to  show  a  complete 
inspiration,  extending  even  to  the  words,  than  the  lan- 
guage, oracles  of  God?  Christ,  speaking  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, says,  "  All  things  which  are  written  concerning  me  in 
Moses,  the  prophets,  and  the  Psalms,  must  be  fulfilled."  It 
is  worthy  of  remark  that  Jesus  Christ  and  the  apostles 
habitually  applied  the  title  of  loropliets  to  all  the  authors  of  the 
Old  Testament.  Their  habitual  designation  of  the  entire 
Scriptures  was,  "Moses  and  the  prophets."  David  says, 
"  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  has  spoken  by  me.''  "And  his  word 
was  upon  my  tongue.'^  Says  Christ  to  the  Jews,  "Is  it  not 
written  hi  your  law  ?"  thus  afiirming  the  divine  authority  of 
their  Scriptures ;  thus  agreeing  with  the  testimony  of  Zacha- 
rias,  in  Luke,  "  It  is  God  who  hath  spoken  by  the  mouth  of 
his  holy  prophets,  which  have  been  since  the  world  began." 
It  was  twenty  or  thirty  years  after  the  Pentecost  that  Peter 
was  pleased  to  quote  "  All  the  epistles  of  Paul,  his  well- 
beloved  brother,"  and  that  he  spoke  of  them  as  "  sacred 
writings,"  which  already  in  his  day  made  part  of  the  holy 
letters  and  were  to  be  classed  with  the  rest  of  the  Scriptures. 
He  assigns  to  them  the  same  rank,  and  he  declares  that 
ignorant  men    could    not   pervert   them  but   to   their   own 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  501 

destruction.  We  quote  this  important  passage  :  "  Even  as 
our  beloved  brother  Paul  also,  according  to  the  wisdom  given 
unto  him,  hath  written  unto  you;  as  also  in  all  his  epistles, 
speaking  in  them  of  these  things ;  in  which  are  some  things 
hard  to  be  understood,  which  they  that  are  unlearned  and 
unstable  wrest,  as  they  do  also  the  other  scriptures,  unto 
their  own  destruction." 

Many  other  passages  might  be  given  to  show  the  plenary 
inspiration  of  the  Bible,  an  inspiration  so  perfect  as  to  extend 
to  the  words  written.  Such  an  inspiration  is  also  confirmed 
by  the  reason  that  often  the  prophets  themselves  did  not 
understand  the  full  import  of  what  they  wrote,  and  conse- 
quently must  have  been  directed  in  their  very  language. 
"With  such  an  inspiration  the  conduct  of  the  Jews  in  respect 
to  their  Scriptures,  and  the  sentiments  of  the  Christian 
Church  in  the  first  century  and  in  later  times,  concur.  If 
such  an  amount  of  evidence  does  not  establish  the  plenary 
inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  we  are  at  a  loss  to  conceive 
what  argument  can  do  it. 

Plenary  inspiration  has,  especially,  relation  to  the  original 
manuscripts  from  which  the  Bible  has  been  copied.  Nor  does 
it  attempt  any  nice  subdivision,  or  lay  down  any  rules  by  which 
in  one  chapter  we  may  detect  the  inspiration  of  suggestion, 
in  another  that  of  elevation,  and  in  another  that  of  superin- 
tendence. Great  confusion  has  arisen  from  confounding  the 
book  itself  with  the  mind  of  the  writer.  But  plenary  inspi- 
ration does  not  so  much  contemplate  the  mind  of  the  writer  as 
that  which  is  written;  its  purpose  is  consummated  if  what  is 
written  is  such  as  God  himself  would  write  were  human  instru- 
mentality discarded.  Consequently,  the  mind  of  the  writer 
may  be  in  an  endless  varietj'  of  states,  and  yet,  with  the 
widest  diversity  of  feeling  and  thought,  there  may  be  plenary 
inspiration.  ISTor  does  the  true  idea  of  this  inspiration 
admit  that  one  part  of  the  Bible  is  any  less  or  an^-  more  in- 
spired than  another,  or  that  in  one  place  there  is  an  inspira- 
tion of  a  high  kind  and  in  another  of  an  inferior  kind. 
Either  the  Bible  is  plenarily  inspired,  or  it  is  not :  if  it  is,  then 
one  part  of  the  Bible  is  as  truly  the  word  of  God  as  another 


502  THE  PLENABT  INSPIRATION 

pitrt ;  if  it  is  not,  then  those  parts  of  the  Bible  which  are  unin- 
spired are  not  of  divine  authority.  If  the  general  inspiration 
of  the  Bible  is  admitted,  then  it  becomes  those  who  deny  its 
plenary  inspiration  to  show  clearly  what  parts  are  not  inspired. 
It  is  not  enough  to  admit  in  vague  language  that  the  Bible  is 
tlie  word  of  God ;  it  must  be  shown  what  part  is  not  the  word 
of  God.  It  is  not  enough  to  contend  for  diverse  kinds  of  in- 
spiration ;  the  line  should  be  clearly  drawn  where  the  inspi- 
ration of  superintendeucy  becomes  that  of  elevation,  or  the 
inspiration  of  elevation  becomes  that  of  suggestion.  If  the 
Bible  makes  no  such  distinctions,  it  is  not  necessary  that  we 
should.  The  difficulty  lies  in  misapprehending  what  is  meant 
by  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible.  Let  us  suppose  that  a 
man  who  wishes  to  communicate  certain  important  facts  in 
respect  to  his  family,  and  with  those  facts  certain  moral  in- 
structions, to  a  friend  in  a  distant  land,  employs  his  son  as  an 
amanuensis  to  write  to  that  friend.  Now,  some  things  the  sou 
may  know  without  any  direct  instruction  from  the  father; 
some  things  he  may  not  know,  and  may  need  direct  instruc- 
tion ;  some  things  he  may  partially  know,  and  in  those  respects 
in  which  he  is  ignorant  he  may  need  to  be  set  right.  The 
son  writes  the  letter,  and  the  father  indorses  it,  after  reading 
it  over,  with  his  name.  That  letter  is  trul}-  the  fatlier's  letter; 
it  communicates  his  mind,  it  expresses  his  thoughts, — it  may 
be  all  the  better  for  embodying  the  peculiarities  of  the  son's 
mind.  What  more  reasonable  than  that  God  should  in  like 
manner,  in  his  letters  to  his  children,  make  use  of  the  diverse 
individuality  of  the  writers  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  em- 
body the  endless  diversities  of  thought  peculiar  to  each  writer? 
Why  doubt  the  pknary  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  because 
a  free  use  is  made  of  the  peculiarities  of  every  mind  and  age  ? 
Were  truths  communicated  by  every  writer  in  the  same 
manner,  we  should  suspect  collusion  or  mutual  connivance. 
But  the  very  diversity  of  style  by  each  writer  obviating  alto- 
gether this  difficulty,  is  often  spoken  of  in  such  a  way  as  to 
disparage  their  plenary  inspiration.  Great  confusion  will 
arise  in  the  mind  unless  the  writing  and  the  writer  are 
not  always    kept  distinct  in  the  consideration  of  the  sub- 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  503 

ject  of  plenarj^  inspiration.  Upon  the  clay  of  Pentecost 
many  spoke  with  new  tongues,  and  in  a  high  sense  may,  in 
their  thoughts  and  feelings,  have  been  under  the  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit;  but  Peter  and  the  apostles  alone  were  au- 
thorized to  write  with  an  authority  as  great  for  their  Epis- 
tles as  for  the  very  words  that  issued  from  them  upon 
that  memorable  occasion.  The  Apostle  Paul,  for  example, 
had  not  "  received  the  gospel  from  man,  but  by  revelation 
of  Jesus  Christ."  He  wrote  "all  his  letters,"  as  St.  Peter 
tells  us,  "  not  only  with  the  words  which  the  Holy  Grhost 
teacheth,  but  also  as  were  the  other  scriptures  [of  the  Old 
Testament],  according  to  the  wisdom  given  unto  him." 

It  will,  then,  be  seen  that  what  may  have  been  the  peculiar 
state  of  the  mind  of  the  writers  of  the  Bible,  what  rna}^  have 
been  the  diversity  of  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon 
each  writer,  are  inquiries  that  do  not  enter  into  the  subject 
of  plenary  inspiration.  From  the  nature  of  the  case,  these  in- 
quiries are  too  intricate  and  involved  to  afford  any  good 
ground  to  stand  upon.  We  do  not  know  but  that  the  mode 
of  the  Spirit's  influence  changed  with  every  writer,  or  that 
the  same  writer  was  under  different  influences  of  a  high  or 
a  low  degree  at  different  times ;  but,  as  in  the  illustration  of 
the  son  who  was  the  amanuensis  of  his  father  in  writing  to  a 
friend  in  a  distant  land,  it  was  seen  that  the  authoritj'  of  the 
father  was  not  affected  by  his  accommodation  to  the  peculi- 
arities of  the  mind  of  the  son,  or  by  his  permission  to  write 
things  known  equally  as  well  by  the  son  as  by  the  father,  so 
also  in  the  word  of  God  an  accommodation  to  the  mind  of 
the  writer,  or  a  permission  to  write  things  that  did  not  need 
a  direct  revelation,  in  no  respect  invalidates  the  divine  au- 
thority of  the  writing.  All  that  is  necessary  to  know  is  the 
simple  fact.  Are  the  writings  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ments, mdiscriminatehj  called  the  word  of  God,  acknowledged 
without  limitation  to  be  inspired,  and  treated  as  such,  by  the 
Jews  and  the  early  Christians  ? 

We  have  already  shown  the  frequent  and  direct  asser- 
tion b}'  the  sacred  writers  of  their  inspiration.  It  has  been 
seen  that  they  acknowledged  no  graduated  scale  of  high  or 


504  THE  PLENARY  L\SPIBATION 

low  inspiration,  or  confessed  to  one  part  of"  the  Bible  as  of 
greater  authority  than  another.  These  retined  distinctions 
are  the  work  of  a  later  day.  They  are  not  even  intimated 
in  the  Bible.  The  Gospels  are  not  extolled  more  than  the 
Epistles,  or  the  New  Testament  praised  at  the  expense  of  the 
Old.  Christ  himself  asserts  that  he  came  not  to  destroy  the  law 
or  the  prophets,  but  to  establish  them ;  he  came  as  a  living 
illustration  of  the  divine  truth  of  the  Old  Testament,  not  to 
supersede  it  as  good  only  for  a  barbarous  age,  but  through 
all  coming  time  to  give  the  impress  by  every  prophetic  fulfill- 
ment of  the  divinity  of  its  origin.  ISTo  reasoning  is  so  desti- 
tute of  proof  as  that  which  infers  that  because  the  coming  of 
Christ  was  the  superseding  of  the  ceremonial  law,  therefore 
it  was  the  superseding  of  the  Old  Testament.  But  nothing 
can  supersede  or  dispense  with  an  inspired  book :  if  it  comes 
from  God,  its  authority  is  divine,  were  its  age  millions  of 
years.  The  ceremonial  law,  with  the  Levitical  rites,  as 
adapted  for  one  age  and  one  nation  alone,  like  the  Ark  of 
the  Covenant  or  the  sacred  temple,  has  passed  away,  and 
the  express  mission,  example,  and  precepts  of  Christ  have 
dispensed  with  their  observance. 

But  what  has  that  to  do  with  the  fact  of  the  inspiration  of 
the  Old  Testament,  or  the  binding  authority  of  that,  even  as 
of  the  E^ew,  with  the  single  exception  of  the  ceremonial  and 
Levitical  law  and  rites,  alone  instituted  for  a  particular  age 
of  the  world  and  one  nation  ? 

One  of  the  greatest  mistakes  in  respect  to  a  divine  revela- 
tion is  the  losing  sight  of  its  progressive  nature.  The  Bible 
is  not  stereotyped  for  one  age ;  it  is  a  book  for  all  ages.  Con- 
sequently, it  must  at  the  same  time  be  local  and  universal, 
must  have  a  specifi.c  adaptation  to  certain  periods  of  the  world 
and  a  general  adaptation  to  all  periods  and  all  nations.  Why 
overlook  a  feature  so  essential  for  a  genuine  inspiration,  and 
make  that  very  fact  which  is  a  high  argument  for  its  divine 
authority  an  excuse  for  the  disparaging  of  its  claims  ?  Were 
the  Bible  adapted  only  for  the  present  age  of  the  world, 
we  should  see  mdeed  nothing  in  it  antiquated  or  old-fash- 
ioned, nothing  but  an  exclusive  fitness  for  the  present  state 


OF   THE  :BIBLE.  505 

of  society.  But  would  not  this  supposed  excellence  be  a 
great  defect  ?  In  some  other  age  of  the  world,  where  revolu- 
tions have  altered  all  the  existing  relations  of  society,  how 
deeply  would  be  felt  this  deficiency  in  the  Scriptures  ! 
Why,  then,  should  we  seek  to  improve  upon  God's  method 
of  revealing  truth  ?  Why  should  we  imagine  that  our 
modern  standard  is  any  better  than  the  standard  of  God's 
own  choosing? 

There  is  another  mistake  in  respect  to  tlie  inspiration  of 
the  Bible,  deserving  of  careful  consideration.  It  is  that  di- 
rect assertions  of  inspiration  should  be  made  by  each  writer 
of  the  Bible  to  give  sufficient  proof  of  the  plenary  inspira- 
tion of  the  Scriptures.  But  upon  what  does  the  inspiration 
of  the  Scriptures  rest  ?  Not  simply  upon  their  own  assertion 
of  inspiration.  What  would  that  assertion  be  worth  were 
there  no  adaptation  in  the  Bible  to  our  wants,  no  miracles 
and  no  prophecies  ?  To  prove  conclusively  the  inspiration 
of  the  Bible,  we  must  first  consider  those  separate  chains  of 
argument  embodied  in  the  necessity,  the  adaptation,  the 
miracles,  the  prophecies,  the  success  of  Christianity  in  the 
first  century,  and  especially  the  perfect  character  of  Christ 
and  his  divine  mission.  While  these  separate  chains  of 
proof  exist,  the  Bible  would  be  clearly  of  divine  origin,  even 
if  not  one  word  was  said  of  its  inspiration.  The  inspiration 
of  the  Bible  is  shown  far  more  by  these  tests  than  bj"  any 
assertions  by  the  sacred  writers  of  their  own  inspiration.  But 
the  manner  in  which  Christ  referred  to  the  Old  Testament, 
the  uniform  respect  and  deference  with  which  he  treated  it, 
the  way  in  which  it  was  regarded  by  the  Jews,  their  scrupu- 
lous exactness  in  its  preservation,  the  testimony  of  Josephus 
and  all  their  historians  to  its  sacred  character,  and  the  sub- 
sequent testimony  to  the  inspiration  of  the  New  Testament, 
combine  to  give  a  higher  confirmation  to  the  divine  authority 
of  the  Bible.  The  difficulty  in  our  ideas  of  the  inspiration 
of  the  Bible  is  that  we  are  constantlj^  inclined  to  look  only 
to  one  side  of  the  question  and  to  confine  our  view  to  one 
aspect  of  the  subject.  But  let  us  consider  that  all  the  sep- 
arate proofs  given  to  us  of  the  divine  authority  of  the  Bible 


606  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

are  iutiiiiately  blended  together,  and,  like  the  colors  of  the 
rainbow,  form  one  glorious  arch. 

Consider,  then,  the  magnitude  of  the  task  of  that  man 
who  attempts  to  prove  the  Bible  uninspired.  Before  he  can 
succeed  in  such  a  task,  he  must  show  false  not  one  chain  of 
proof,  but  the  whole  foundation  upon  which  rests  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Bible.  He  must,  step  by  step,  remove  each 
separate  chain  from  its  place,  and  prove  the  whole  a  fabrica- 
tion of  man.  He  must  impeach  the  character  of  Christ 
himself,  and  prove  the  divine  Author  of  Christianity  either 
an  impostor  or  an  ignorant  enthusiast.  He  must  show  that 
the  writers  of  the  Bible  were  either  deceivers  or  deceived; 
and  then,  after  establishing  as  a  fact  that  the  Bible  is  the 
work  either  of  impostors  or  of  men  imposed  upon,  he  must 
admit,  in  the  very  face  of  his  successful  logic,  that  the  Bible, 
after  all,  is  the  most  sublime,  the  most  useful,  the  most  ex- 
cellent production  the  world  has  ever  seen, — that,  true  or 
false,  to  remove  it  from  society  would  leave  a  blank  so  de- 
plorable as  to  make  even  atheism  tremble  and  infidelity  grow 
pale  with  fear. 

Upon  such  a  foundation  does  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible 
rest.  Did  we  look  to  one  kind  of  proof  alone,  our  minds 
might  sometimes  be  troubled  by  the  objections  of  the 
skeptic  ;  but  when  we  consider  that  the  inspiration  of  the 
Bible  can  lay  claim,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  all  the  separate 
chains  of  reasoning  that  go  to  prove  the  Scriptures  from 
God, — when  we  consider  that  the  deeper  the  examination  the 
more  clearly  blazes  forth  the  truth  of  the  divinity  of  the 
Scriptures, — then  truly  do- we  have  the  highest  demonstra- 
tion that  they  come  from  God. 

Of  those  who  deny  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible,  it 
may  be  asked.  Why  more  difficult  for  God  to  have  the  whole 
Bible  inspired  than  a  part  of  it  ?  In  nature  we  see  no  half- 
work;  what  is  made  is  perfect  in  its  kind,  as  it  comes  from 
God,  and  adapted  to  its  end.  Is  it  not  as  necessary  that  the 
written  word  should  be  as  free  from  defects  as  the  works  of 
nature  ?  Is  the  mighty  process  of  redemption  in  its  record 
Jess  important,  and  do  we  see  a  finish  in  the  one  that  we  do 


OF   THE  BIBLE.  507 

not  in  the  other?  Consider  that  the  separate  chains  of  evi- 
dence upon  whicli  the  entire  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures 
rests  are  not  confined  to  one  book  of  the  Bible,  but  are 
common  to  the  whole.  When,  therefore,  we  say  such  a 
part  of  the  Bible  is  not  inspired,  to  be  consistent  we  must 
show  that  it  is  not  linked  in  with  the  rest,  and  that  its  re- 
moval would  be  no  injury  to  the  whole.  But  can  we 
cut  out  this  or  that  part  of  the  Bible  as  useless  or  as  an 
excrescence?  Can  we  treat  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  we  would 
treat  a  vase  of  precious  stones  and  stubble  and  dirt  and 
rubbish?  Can  w^e  say,  Here  are  the  precious  stones,  and  here 
the  useless  rubbish  ?  But,  if  the  Bible  was  only  in  part  inspired, 
this  would  be  a  correct  proceeding.  The  business  of  the 
commentator  would  be  chiefly  to  separate  the  inspired  from 
the  uninspired ;  to  label  one  part  of  the  Bible  as  from  God 
and  another  as  from  man, — one  as  of  divine  authority  and  the 
other  as  only  of  human  origin  and  consequently  having  no 
more  than  a  hmnan  sanction.  But,  worse  than  this,  upon 
such  a  supposition  we  are  afloat  upon  a  wide  sea  of  uncer- 
tainty and  doubt.  Who  can  prove  that  any  landmarks  are 
given  in  the  Bible  b}^  which  one  part  may  be  shown  human 
alid  another  divine, — o-ne  from  God  and  another  only  from 
man  ?  Who  can  show  those  places  that  rest  upon  the  infalli- 
l)le  authority  of  God,  and  those  portions  which  are  supported 
onh'  by  the  fallible  opinions  of  man  ?  Is  it  not  easy  to  see  that 
instead  of  our  reason  deciding  upon  the  general  fact  of  the 
Bible  as  the  word  of  God,  it  must  have  put  upon  it  the 
task  of  culling  out  the  human  from  the  divine, — that  the 
infiillibility  of  the  Scriptures  would  be  seriously  injured? 
Here  are  two  authorities, — one  fallible,  the  other  infallible, 
and  both  mixed  up  together.  Where  are  we  ?  The  boast  of 
the  Papal  church  is  its  infallibility,  but  the  glory  of  Protest- 
antism is  the  belief  in  the  one  only  infallible  standard  contained 
in  the  Bible, 

But  when  we  admit  that  some  parts  of  the  Bible  are  from 
God  and  some  parts  not  from  God, — some  portions  divine, 
some  only  human, — we  must,  to  be  consistent,  say  that  those 
parts  of  the  Bible  alone  human  must  be  fallible,  and  carry 


508  THK   PLENARY  INSPIBATION 

with  tbera  no  higher  sanction  than  any  other  production  of 
man.  And  then  at  once  we  oome  to  the  chief  difficulty, 
How  are  these  two  parts  to  be  so  separated  as  always  to  be 
distinguished  and  never  to  blend  into  each  other  ?  Would 
we  not  by  this  really  give  to  Romanism  its  greatest  power  of 
assault,  and  confess  that  the  church  alone  should  say  what  is 
to  be  received  as  divine  and  what  is  to  be  rejected  as  only 
human  ?  Would  we  not  say  by  this  that  the  Bible  was  not 
to  be  read  by  all  classes  of  persons,  unless  as  interpreted  by 
the  constitutional  authority  of  the  church?  Thus  it  will  be 
seen  that  the  moment  we  undertake  to  cut  up  the  Bible  into 
two  parts,  one  fallible  and  the  other  infallible,  we  weaken 
the  evidence  of  the  whole  ;  we  give  credit  to  the  assumptions 
of  the  Romanists,  and  give  the  highest  plausibility  to  the 
papal  dogma  of  infallibility. 

The  true  idea  of  plenary-  inspiration  leaves  an  ample  mar- 
gin for  the  human  element  in  the  Bible,  while  it  does  not 
conflict  with  the  divine  element :  it  only  insists  upon  the  plain 
fact  that  what  it  indorses  by  God  as  his  word  should  have' 
his  authority  coexisting  with  it.  In  no  other  waj-  can  the  Bible, 
with  its  ample  proofs  of  divinity,  have  that  influence  over 
the  human  mind  that  belongs  to  it  by  equity  and  all  reason. 
True,  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  according  to  the 
fundamental  principle  of  Protestantism,  every  person,  must 
answer  to  his  own  conscience  and  to  God  for  the  word  read ; 
but  this  is  infinitely  safer  and  more  in  harmony  with  right 
liberty  and  wisdom,  than  having  the  Council  of  Trent  decide 
upon  our  faith,  or  a  papal  priesthood  tell  us  what  of  the 
Bible  we  should  read  and  what  we  should  not  read,  what 
we  should  believe  upon  in  it  and  what  we  should  not  believe. 

One  of  the  most  fruitful  sources  of  infidelity  is  the  confused 
idea  held  as  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Whether  the  Bible  is  indeed  from  God,  or  only  from  man,  is 
the  great  question  of  the  present  day.  It  has  been  the  question 
of  all  ages,  and  will  be  to  all  time  to  come,  until  sin,  temp- 
tation, and  all  moral  evil  are  banished  from  the  earth.  Con- 
stituted, then,  as  human  nature  is,  fallen  as  it  is,  can  it  be 
expected   that   a   book    that   conies   into    such    antagonism 


OF  THE  BIBLE.  509 

with  all  sin,  be  it  in  the  individual  or  in  the  State,  that  sets 
forth  principles  that  cut  at  the  root  of  every  organized  system 
of  oppression  or  error,  of  superstition  and  wrong,  should  not 
encounter  the  most  searching  scrutiny  ?  The  Bible  welcomes 
such  a  scrutiny,  but  pronounces  its  anathema  upon  those  who 
are  compelled  to  confess  its  truth,  its  divinity,  and  yet  who 
will  not  receive  it  or  in  any  true  sense  believe  in  it.  ]^ow, 
we  say  that  the  Bible,  affixing  consequences  so  weighty  upon 
its  reception  or  rejection,  will  not,  if  from  God,  be  deiicient 
in  evidence  to  show  this.  There  is  too  much  at  stake  to  doubt 
for  a  moment  this  assertion.  Consequently,  the  Bible  may 
justly  be  said  to  be  full  of  all  evidences  to  show  it  from  God. 
View  it  under  any  or  all  aspects,  and  the  mind  is  over- 
whelmed with  the  greatness  and  the  variety  of  proof.  It  is 
most  siiitable  that  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible  should 
be  just  as  it  is, — no  more,  and  no  less.  Xo  more;  for  then 
the  human  element  intimately  blended  with  it,  interwoven 
like  the  thread  in  the  very  cloth  itself,  would  be  deficient, 
and  then  the  Bible  would  lose  its  strongest  access  to  the 
heart  of  man  :  it  might  be  a  better  book  for  angels,  but  it 
would  not  be  so  good  for  man.  All  that  plenary  inspiration 
claims  is  just  enough  of  divinity  to  give  to  the  IIol}'  Scriptures 
the  roj'al  seal  of  God's  own  hand;  this,  with  all  reasonable 
persons,  should  be  sufficient.  In  the  Bible,  human  instru- 
mentality, with  the  endless  diversities  of  human  feeling  and 
expression,  and  the  modes  of  thought  common  to  one  age  of 
the  world  and  to  all  ages,  is  made  use  of.  But  this  is  its  highest 
charm :  it  shows  that,  as  the  Sabbath  was  made  for  man,  so 
the  Bible  was  made  for  man  ;  it  is  man's  book  and  it  is  God's 
book;  it  is  man's  treasure  and  God's  blessing;  it  is  man's 
birthright,  and  yet  God's  gift.  All  other  books  in  contrast 
are  insignificant;  for  it  contains  all  human  wisdom  and  all 
divine  wisdom,  an  incarnation  of  truth  and  a  divinity  of 
origin.  Plenary  inspiration  is,  then,  appropriately  the  sum- 
ming up  of  all  the  other  multitudinous  evidences  of  the 
Bible,  and  carrying  with  them  the  declaration  "  that  all 
Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God."  So  intimately 
blended  together  are  all  the  Scriptures,  that  we  cannot  sever 


510     THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION  OF   THE  BIBLE. 

one  portion  from  the  rest  without  invalidating  the  whole. 
To  prove  the  Old  Testament  not  divine,  is  not  indeed  to 
prove  the  New  not  from  God  ;  but  most  seriously  it  injures 
the  evidence  of  the  New  Testament.  To  prove  one  book  of 
the  New  Testament  not  from  God,  does  not  disprove  the 
other  books;  but  it  greatly  weakens  the  strength  of  their 
evidence. 

In  respect  to  the  variations  in  different  readings,  they  are 
too  insignificant  to  deserve  attention,  and  all  can  be  referred 
to  the  diversity  of  copyists.  In  no  respect  can  it  be  shown 
that  they  afl:ect  the  fact  of  inspiration  ;  and  as  for  errors,  it  is 
time  enough  to  admit  them  when  they  are  proved.  More 
than  eighteen  centuries  have  elapsed  since  the  death  and  the 
resurrection  of  Christ;  there  has  been  no  want  of  opposers 
and  enemies  to  the  Bible,  of  every  variety  of  talent  and 
every  advantage  of  observation;  and  yet  not  a  single  error  of 
any  fact  of  history,  any  truth  of  science,  or  any  contradiction 
of  testimony  among  the  writers  of  the  Bible  has  been  shoAvn. 
Every  discovery  of  science,  every  additional  light  thrown 
upon  the  history  of  the  past,  every  research  into  antiquity, 
has  only  confirmed  the  truthfulness  of  the  Bible.  The  prog- 
ress of  knowledge  has  shown  that  the  errors  lay  in  our 
minds,  not  in  the  word  of  God,  and  that  our  ignorance  was 
the  mother  of  those  faults  that  are  attributed  to  the  Bible. 
And  thus  will  it  be  proved  true  that  the  Bible  is  inspired' by 
God,  even  though  the  heavens  and  the  earth  should  pass 
away. 


CHAPTER    XIX. 

HISTORIC    OUTLINE    OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT    THEOLOGY. 

The  Old  Testament  marks  a  period  of  the  world  essentially 
different  from  the  New  Testament.  With  the  former  com- 
mence the  creation  of  the  world,  the  fall  of  man,  the  patri- 
archal and  the  legal  dispensations. 

Let  us  consider  the  Old  Testament  in  its  revelation  of  God. 
But  what  is  the  mode  of  all  revelation  of  God  to  us?  Is  it 
a  complete  communication  of  all  truth  at  once,  or  is  it  the 
gradual  unfolding  of  truth  at  difterent  periods  of  the  world  ? 
Evidently,  the  latter.  And  yet,  because  there  is  not  the 
same  communication  of  truth  in  the  Old  Testament  as  in  the 
New, — because  when  the  Christian  economy  commenced 
there  was  a  higher  development  of  truth, — many  have  under- 
rated the  Old  Testament ;  they  have  imagined  that  it  was 
superseded  by  the  New  Testament.  But  the  New  Testament 
uniformly  confirms  the  Old  and  is  built  upon  it.  It  indeed 
introduces  us  to  a  higher  stage  of  truth,  but  at  the  same 
time  it  rests  as  a  foundation  upon  the  Old.  In  considering, 
then,  the  revelation  of  God  in  the  Old  Testament,  we  must 
bear  in  mind  that  this  revelation  was  in  accordance  with  the 
existing  wants  of  the  world.  It  Avas  a  revelation  that  was 
best  adapted  to  the  state  of  society  existing  before  the  ush- 
ering in  of  the  Christian  dispensation.  Many  seem  to  forget 
this  great  fact,  in  judging  of  the  Old  Testament.  They  do 
not  carry  their  minds  back  to  the  early  age  of  the  world,  and 
consider  the  peculiar  wants  of  a  period  far  remote  from  the 
present.  The  Old  Testament  has  three  distinct  periods  of 
time, — that  which  is  comprised  in  the  antediluvian  world, 
that  which  is  included  in  the  post-diluvian  age,  or  the  age 
of  the  patriarchs,  and  that  which  comprehends  the  Mosaic 

(511) 


512  HISTORIC   OUTLINE   OF  THE 

economy,  or  legal  dispensation.  The  antediluvian  world  forms 
a  period  of  history  remarkable  for  its  brevity.  All  that 
remains  to  ns  of  this  distant  age  is  embodied  in  a  few 
chapters  of  Genesis;  but  enough  is  told  us  to  reveal  the 
extreme  apostas}^  of  man  and  the  mercy  and  justice  of  God. 
The  age  of  the  post-diluvian  patriarchs  makes  known  to 
us  a  period  of  the  world  recovering  from  the  great  catas- 
trophe of  the  deluge,  with  the  confusion  of  tongues  at  Babel, 
and  the  regal  authority  invested  in  a  few  great  heads  of 
families.  The  Mosaic  dispensation  gives  to  us  an  election 
from  the  nations  of  the  earth  of  a  distinct  people,  who  were 
destined  to  be  the  chosen  depositaries  of  the  Scriptures  and 
to  be  signally  distinguished  by  privileges  and  divine  interpo- 
sitions in  their  favor.  Thus  the  different  ages  of  the  world 
before  the  coming  of  Christ  demanded  a  revelation  from  God 
adapted  to  the  peculiar  stiite  of  each  period  of  time;  and 
thus  we  find  it.  One  melancholy  fact,  confirmed  by  all  his- 
tory, is  taught  us  in  the  Bible, — the  extreme  tendency  of 
man  to  degenerate.  We  find  this  most  clearly  shown  in  the 
antediluvian  world.  Here  we  read  of  two  classes,  called  the 
sons  of  God  and  the  daughters  of  men,  and  of  the  rapid 
corruption  of  the  better  part  of  society  by  the  unlawful  in- 
tercourse with  the  most  depraved,  until  the  whole  earth  then 
peopled  revealed  one  loathsome  mass  of  moral  pollution. 
A  few  good  men  in  vain  strove  to  resist  the  depravity  of  the 
times.  Then  came  the  deluge,  sweeping  awaj'  the  guilty 
inhabitants  of  the  world.  But  the  antediluvian  earth,  from 
the  great  longevity  of  the  population,  had  the  noblest  oppor- 
tunity of  having  through  tradition  a  knowledge  of  the  fall, 
and  of  becoming  acquainted  with  the  character  of  God. 
"When  the  legal  dispensation  was  introduced,  we  see  a  widely 
different  state  of  the  world.  The  new  world  had  become  to 
a  great  extent  peopled.  The  confusion  of  tongues  had 
resulted  in  scattering  multitudes  over  the  earth.  But  the 
whole  earth  then  inhabited  had  relapsed  into  idolatry.  The 
primitive  ideas  of  God  in  his  unity  and  moral  excellence  had 
been  greatly  obscured.  Subordinate  divinities  had  usurped 
the  place  of  the  supreme  God,  and  the  nations  of  the  earth 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  513 

had  followed  after  idols  that  neither  see,  nor  hear,  nor  taste, 
nor  smell,  nor  touch, — idols  originally  but  representatives  of 
imaginary  gods,  but  whose  worship  soon  degenerated  into  the 
deification  of  human  beings.  What,  then,  was  the  great  de- 
sign of  the  legal  dispensation  ?  It  was  to  rescue  a  people  from 
the  grossness  of  the  surrounding  paganism,  and  free  them 
from  the  bewitching  snares  of  idolatry.  But  in  what  did 
the  idolatry  of  the  ancient  world  consist?  Was  it  the  denial 
altogether  of  one  supreme  God,  or  was  it  not  rather  the 
gross  corruption  of  this  first  truth  of  religion  ?  Evidently, 
the  latter. 

The  learned  Cudworth  has  clearly  proved  "  that  the  pagan 
polytheism  must  be  understood  as  used  for  created  intel- 
lectual beings,  superior  to  men,  that  ought  to  be  religiously 
worshiped.  That  this  was  no  refinement  or  interpolation  of 
paganism,  as  might  possibly  be  suspected,  but  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  most  ancient  pagan  theologers  and  greatest 
promoters  of  polytheism  was  agreeable  hereunto.  First,  Zo- 
roaster, the  chief  promoter  of  polytheism  in  the  Eastern  parts, 
acknowledged  one  supreme  Deity,  the  maker  of  the  world, 
proved  from  Eubulus  in  Porphyry,  besides  his  own  words 
cited  by  Eusebius.  That  Orpheus,  commonly  called  by  the 
Greeks  the  Theologer,  asserted  one  supreme  Deity,  proved 
b}'  his  own  words  out  of  pagan  theology.  That  the  Egyptians 
themselves,  the  most  polytheistic  of  all  nations,  had  an  ac- 
knowledgment among  them  of  one  supreme  Deity.  That  the 
poets,  who  were  the  greatest  depravers  of  the  pagan  theology, 
and  by  their  fables  of  the  gods  made  it  look  more  aristocrat- 
ically, did  themselves,  notwithstanding,  acknowledge  a  mon- 
archy, one  prince  and  father  of  gods.  That  all  the  pagan 
pliilosophers  who  were  theist  universally  asserted  a  mundane 
monarchy.  Pythagoras,  as  much  apolytheist  as  any,  and  yet 
his  first  principle  of  things  as  well  as  numbers,  a  monad  or 
unity.  Anaxagoras,  one  mind  ordering  all  things  for  good. 
Xenophanes,  one  and  all,  and  his  one  god  the  greatest  among 
gods." 

This  opinion  of  Cudworth  is  high  authority  to  confirm  the 
fact  that  a  First  Cause,  or  Supreme  God,  was  generally  ac- 

33 


514  HIST  OB  I C   OUTLINE   OF   THE 

knowledged  among  the  ancient  pagans.  But  here  was  \\\q  great 
mistake.  The  idea  of  one  supreme  God  was  not  only  merely 
speculative,  exerting  no  practical  influence  over  the  popular 
mind,  but  that  idea  was  immeasurably  corrupted  by  the  intro- 
duction of  subordinate  divinities.  God  was  forgotten  among 
the  increasing  host  of  idols  who  had  usurped  the  place  of  all 
worship.  Thus,  while  one  God  in  theory  might  be  held  to, 
in  practice  inferior  divinities  controlled  the  mind  and  ab- 
sorbed the  affections  of  the  multitude.  Indeed,  the  pagan 
polytheism  consisted  in  the  deification  of  the  creature  and 
the  total  neglect  of  all  devotion  to  the  Creator.  Commencinsr 
in  its  mildest  form  with  the  worship  of  the  sun  and  moon 
and  stars,  the  adoration  of  fire  and  the  elements  of  earth, 
air,  and  w^ater,  it  passed  through  successive  stages  of  degen- 
eracy until  it  comprehended  the  adoration  of  the  meanest  of 
reptiles  and  insects.  Thus  the  host  of  gods  continued  to  in- 
crease, until  in  some  places  there  w^ere  as  many  gods  as 
people,  thirty  thousand  being  reckoned  at  Rome  itself.  But 
the  worst  feature  connected  with  the  pagan  polytheism  was  the 
rapid  corruption  of  manners  from  the  deification  of  things 
vicious  and  contemptible.  When  the  standard  of  moral 
excellence  was  so  low,  what  must  have  been  the  di-pravity  en- 
gendered !  Thus,  we  see  the  most  cruel  rites,  the  most  licen- 
tious practices,  connected  with  the  worship  of  the  gods.  The 
intellect  and  heart  were  immeasurably  debased.  The  most 
sacred  relations  of  the  family  were  grossly  broken  in  upon, 
and  the  transition  was  rapid  from  the  corruption  of  manners 
to  the  most  galling  servitude  of  body. 

Another  feature  connected  with  the  ancient  polytheism 
was  its  alliance  with  the  state.  The  state  upheld  the  popu- 
lar religion,  and  the  religion  upheld  the  state.  What  was  the 
consequence?  Political  slavery  went  hand  in  hand  with  the 
superstition  of  the  masses,  and  the  idolatry  of  the  people 
helped  on  the  tyranny  of  kings  and  nobles.  Thus  was 
ancient  paganism  not  only  the  source  of  the  deepest  moral 
corruption,  robbing  God  of  his  rightful  homage,  removing 
from  the  mind  the  restraining  fear  of  an  All-wise  Being,  ab- 
solving  from   human    love    his  attributes  of  goodness   and 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  515 

mercy,  and  eradicating  from  the  mind  the  lofty  hopes  his 
true  worship  only  can  create.  Bat  ancient  paganism  was  a 
terrific  state  engine.  Superstition,  taking  the  place  of  the 
true  worship  of  God,  brought  with  it  civil  bondage.  Forg- 
ing a  double  chain  for  mind  and  body,  it  plunged  the  human 
family  into  a  deeper  abyss  of  wretchedness.  Taking  advan- 
tage of  the  principle  in  man  that  upbraids  for  sin,  it  held 
over  an  enslaved  conscience  a  whip  of  scorpions.  Cruelty 
and  impiety  were  the  constant  attendants  upon  pagan  super- 
stition ;  but  there  followed  in  its  train,  also,  a  demon  as  fear- 
ful,— that  of  universal  political  and  moral  slavery.  Thus, 
wherever  pagan  superstition  most  abounded,  there  also  it 
engendered  a  more  debasing  bondage  of  body  and  mind. 
Freedom  died  upon  her  impure  and  bloody  altars,  and  even 
the  natural  virtues  became  ferocious  when  nurtured  b}'  her 
unhallowed  religion.  The  guilt  of  pagan  superstition  and  the 
idolatry  created  by  it  consisted  in  an  abuse  of  the  light  of 
nature,  and  the  reckless  disregard  of  the  light  communi- 
cated through  tradition  from  the  earliest  ages.  The  growing 
love  of  idol  worship  engendered  worse  idols,  and  the  corrupt 
philosophy  and  poetry  of  the  ancients  introduced  a  more 
debasing  condition  of  things.  The  words  of  the  Apostle 
Paul  give  us  a  true  picture  of  the  sin  of  heathendom :  "  Be- 
cause that  when  they  knew  God,  they  glorified  him  not  as 
God,  neither  were  thankful ;  but  became  vain  in  their  im- 
aginations, and  their  foolish  heart  was  darkened.  Profess- 
ing themselves  to  be  wise,  they  became  fools,  and  changed 
the  incorruptible  God  into  an  image  made  like  to  corruptible 
man,  and  to  birds,  and  four-footed  beasts,  and  creeping 
things." 

What,  then,  was  the  great  design  of  the  Jewish  theocracy 
and  the  legal  dispensation?  It  was,  evidently,  to  counteract 
the  ancient  idolatry  and  preserve  the  worship  of  the  true  God. 
The  end  to  be  secured  was  to  unveil  the  character  of  God 
with  greater  distinctness,  and  select  a  nation  for  the  preser- 
vation of  the  divine  oracles.  But  how  could  this  end  be 
reached  without  the  miraculous  interposition  of  God  ?  "When 
Abraham  was  called,  we  see  in  the  father  of  the  faithful  the 


516  HISTORIC   OUTLINE   OF   THE 

first  commencement  of  that  series  of  divine  interpositions 
that  were,  through  successive  ages,  to  grow  brighter  and 
brighter,  and  secure  the  great  end  of  rescuing  the  world 
from  total  apostasy.  Many  seem  to  forget  the  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances that  demanded  the  Jewish  theocracy,  and  the 
mighty  reasons  for  that  series  of  stupendous  miracles  that 
took  place  upon  the  leading  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt. 
Egypt  then  was  the  most  powerful  and  civilized  nation  of 
the  earth.  But  all  this  supremacy  imparted  only  a  more  fatal 
energy  to  the  debasing  superstitions  of  the  Egyptians.  The 
land  of  Egypt  had  degenerated  into  a  land  of  idols.  Priestlj' 
and  civil  tyranny,  both  wedded  to  .the  grossest  idolatry,  had 
withered  the  virtues  of  the  people  and  given  to  their  vices  a 
more  than  ordinary  virulence. 

What  was  to  be  done  ?  If  the  world  was  ever  after  to  be 
redeemed,  or  future  millions  preserved  from  total  estrange- 
ment from  God,  what  better  course  could  be  conceived  of 
than  was  devised  to  turn  back  the  tide  of  moral  corruption 
that  was  fast  fitting  the  world  for  another  deluge?  The 
Israelites  never  would  have  followed  Moses,  never  would 
have  submitted  to  the  long  journey  in  the  desert,  never 
would  have  obeyed  his  rigid  enactments,  had  not  his  mission 
to  them  been  most  clearly  proved  to  be  divine.  How  absurd 
the  supposition  that  nearly  three  millions  of  people  would 
all  consent  to  leave  their  home  in  Egypt,  to  encounter  the 
perils  of  the  desert,  to  give  up  the  idol-worship  of  their 
Egyptian  masters,  to  wander  with  no  natural  means  of  sub- 
sistence for  so  many  years  in  the  desert,  if  God  had  not 
directly  interposed  to  supply  their  wants! 

But  the  great  fact  of  the  drowning  of  the  Egyptians  in  the 
Red  Sea  has  been  confirmed  b}^  sacred  and  profane  history. 
No  proof  has  ever  been  oft'ered  to  show  that  this  memorable 
event  did  not  take  place.  Here,  then,  in  the  miracles  worked 
for  the  preservation  of  the  Israelites  and  the  ruin  of  their 
tyrannical  masters,  we  see  the  great  end  secured  of  interpos- 
ing a  barrier  to  the  wide-spread  desolations  of  polytheism. 
Everything  was  adapted  to  this  end.  The  ancient  systems 
of  superstition  took  captive  the  senses.  Stealing  with  magical 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  517 

power  over  the  heart,  they  corrupted  the  aftections.  Their 
superstition,  allying  itself  with  the  state,  wielded  the  power 
of  the  civil  magistrate,  and,  both  being  linked  together,  there 
followed  one  vast  system  of  bondage  to  body  and  mind,  and 
the  gross  corruption  of  morals.  The  w^orship  of  the  one  true 
God  was  forgotten  in  the  homage  paid  to  inferior  divinities, 
and  the  tendencies  of  the  human  heart,  naturally  downward, 
received  from  the  reigning  idolatry  a  threefold  energ}^  for  evil. 
Conceive,  then,  if  possible,  how  dark  must  have  been  the 
prospects  of  the  world  if  no  such  system  as  the  Mosaic  econ- 
omy had  been  introduced.  Superficial  and  unthinking  minds 
look  with  contempt  upon  the  Jewish  ritual  and  the  peculiar 
laws  and  ordinances  of  the  Israelites.  They  seem  to  think 
unnecessary  the  forms  of  the  theocracy,  and  all  the  details 
of  the  temple  service  and  priesthood  and  sacrifice.  They 
cannot  understand  the  meaning  of  so  strict  a  ceremonial  and 
such  rigid  rites.  But  are  such  persons  conscious  what  the 
condition  of  the  world  then  was,  and  what  was  the  peculiar 
character  of  the  Jewish  mind?  Do  the}'  imagine  that,  with 
their  constant  tendency  to  relapse  into  the  gorgeous  idolatry 
of  the  heathen  around  them,  they  needed  nothing  to  strike 
favorably  tl>e  senses  and  beguile  them  from  the  snares  of 
false  idols  ?  The  whole  system  of  the  Jewish  theocracy  was 
admirably  adapted  to  the  wants  of  the  Israelites.  Their  cei-e- 
monies,  free  from  the  impurity  and  cruelty  of  the  heathen 
rites,  were  most  happily  designed  to  wean  them  from  their 
attachment  to  idolatry.  All  their  rites  were  calculated  to 
make  a  deep  impression  upon  the  senses,  and  thus  to  forestall 
the  fascinations  of  heathen  worship;  and  yet  their  worship 
was  highly  spiritual.  God  was  recognized  as  the  supreme 
authority,  and  the  temporal  rewards  and  chastisements  he 
sent  were  of  the  very  natur(;  to  deliver  the  mind  from  the 
bondage  of  idolatry,  "We  have  spoken  of  the  union  of  church 
and  state  among  the  heathen,  of  the  intimate  connection  of 
the  civil  and  the  ecclesiastical  power,  and  of  the  immeasura- 
ble strength  given  to  idolatrj-  b}'  this  course.  The  Jewish 
theocracy  struck  a  death-blow  at  the  universal  triumph  of 
superstition:   by  uniting  the  civil  with  the  religious  govern 


518    ■  HISTOBIC   OUTLINE   OF   THE 

raent  of  the  Jews,  bj  making  the  autlioritj'  of  God  supreme 
in  church  and  m  state,  it  linked  both  together  at  a  period  of 
the  world  when  every  external  restraint  was  needed  to  sup- 
press the  encroachments  of  heathenism. 

The  power  of  ancient  paganism  consisted  especially  in 
leading  the  mind  of  the  people  to  believe  that  the  control  of 
tlieir  gods  was  exercised  in  all  their  domestic  concerns  and 
all  their  civil  relations.  The  one  God  obscurely  recognized  by 
the  multitude  was  forgotten  in  the  host  of  subordinate  divini- 
ties that  took  under  their  management  the  everj'day  afl'airs  of 
life  and  all  their  social  and  political  relations.  Consequently, 
all  true  ideas  of  the  providence  of  God,  extending  to  all 
thino;s,  exercisino:  a  care  over  the  smallest  as  well  as  the 
greatest  aflairs  of  life,  were  whollj'  lost  sight  of.  With  tins 
forgetful n ess,  all  homage  of  God  was  corrupted  into  the 
worship  of  his  creatures ;  and  false  idols  took  away  that 
sense  of  duty,  of  obligation,  of  fear,  of  hope  and  love,  that 
should  be  centered  upon  the  one  God.  The  church  and 
state  mutually  sustaining  each  other  in  corruption,  both 
secured  the  fatal  bondage  of  mind  and  heart.  But  the 
Jewish  theocracy,  by  uniting  church  and  state,  by  making 
all  authority  to  emanate  from  God,  presented  a  double  barrier 
to  the  encroachments  of  superstition,  God,  in  his  daily 
providence ;  God,  in  his  hatred  of  idols  ;  God,  in  his  per- 
sonal agency;  God,  as  the  rewarder  of  the  good;  God,  as 
the  immediate  author  of  temporal  prosperity  or  adversity ; 
God,  as  forgiving  sin  through  the  medium  of  sacrifices ; 
God,  as  a  visible  guide,  infinite  in  power  and  goodness  ;  God, 
in  his  divine  unity,  abhorring  any  representation  by  images, — 
this  was  the  great  barrier  against  the  attacks  of  idolatry. 
Here  idolatry  was  met  upon  its  own  ground.  Superstition 
had  bound,  for  greater  strength,  church  and  state  together; 
the  Jewish  theocracy  cemented  in  one  bond  of  friendship 
the  civil  and  religious  power.  Superstition  had  captivated 
the  senses  by  imposing  rites  and  a  gorgeous  ceremonial;  the 
Jewish  theocracy  gave  rites  more  imposing  and  a  ceremonial 
far  more  lofty  and  grand.  Superstition  had  seduced  the 
conscience  by  a  false    expiation    in  sacrifices  to   idols ;    the 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  519 

Jewish  theocracy  gave  peace  to  the  troubled  conscience  by 
pure  sacrifices  to  the  one'  God.  Superstition  taught  the 
providence  of  innumerable  gods  over  all  the  affairs  of  life ; 
the  Jewish  theocracy  inculcated  the  providence  of  God  in 
everything  relating  to  this  earthly  existence.  Superstition 
invoked  temporal  sanctions,  and  all  the  motives  drawn  from 
earthly  prosperity  or  adversity,  to  sustain  its  power  over  the 
mind ;  the  Jewish  theocracy  also  revealed  earthly  sanctions, 
and  powerfully  influenced  the  mind  by  fear  and  hope,  drawn 
from  worldly  adversity  or  prosperity. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that,  wherever  the  sway  of  false  idols 
extended,  there  yet  existed  upon  the  earth  one  living  illus- 
tration of  the  one  only  true  God.  The  Jewish  theocracy, 
resplendent  in  miracles,  made  invincible  by  the  personal  inter- 
position of  God,  stood  like  a  mighty  rock  against  the  waves  of 
superstition  that  rolled  against  it.  It  met  superstition  at  every 
avenue.  It  lived  as  a  constant  rebuke  to  the  grossness  of 
idolatry.  Both  b}'  rewarding  the  Isi-aelites  for  obedience 
and  by  punishing  them  for  disobedience,  it  gave  a  lesson  of 
infinite  value  to  the  world.  It  rescued  the  unity  of  God  from 
the  fatal  perversions  of  superstition,  enforced  its  sacredness 
by  demonstrations  of  almighty  power,  and  threw  gleams  of 
light  over  that  moral  darkness  that  had  settled  upon  the 
nations.  But  the  Jewish  theocrac}'  was  most  wonderfully 
adapted  for  the  illustration  of  an  atonement  for  sin.  There  is 
no  error  more  fatal  than  the  belief  that  the  obedience  of  the 
sinner  can  atone  for  sin,  or  satisfy  the  demands  of  infinite 
justice.  But  in  all  the  sacrifices  of  the  Jews  the  doctrine  was 
distinctly  taught  that  some  way  was  provided,  symbolized  by 
the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  for  the  expiation  of  sin.  Here  con- 
science found  a  valid  ground  of  hope;  here  it  rested  under 
its  load  of  sin.  The  Jewish  theocracy  inculcated  faith,  the 
very  principle  that  lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  true  religion, 
and  the  only  thing  that  can  ever  lead  the  heart  to  a  cheerful 
obedience.  But  here  was  its  infinite  superiority  to  the  super- 
stitious belief  of  the  heathen.  The  faith  in  false  idols,  in 
their  power  of  averting  calamity  or  giving  favors,  was  a 
false  faith, — a  faith  of  incalculable  mischief  to  the  heart,  for 


520  HISTORIC   OUTLINE   OF   THE 

if  was  at  war  alike  with  true  reason  and  true  pietj.  But  the 
faith  demanded  of  the  Israelites  in  the  offering  up  of  sacrifices 
was  a  faith  that  embodied  in  it  a  security,  a  reasonable  sense 
of  acceptance  with  God,  that  superstition  was  utterly  deficient 
in.  Consequently,  the  whole  system  of  Jewish  theocracy 
was  most  appropriate  for  an  introduction  to  the  Christian 
dispensation.  It  had  a  part  to  fulfill  of  the  greatest  impor- 
tance in  the  usliering  in  of  a  nobler  system  upon  the  world. 
Let  us,  then,  look  to  some  of  the  principles  of  the  Hebrew 
polity,  as  revealing  the  character  and  attributes  of  God.  One 
great  truth,  that  of  the  creation,  was  taught  by  Moses  in  a 
way  unknown  to  heathen  philosophers.  The  reason  of  man, 
attempting  to  go  bej'ond  its  depth  and  to  plunge  into  the 
deepest  mysteries,  made  darkness  more  dark,  and  led  the 
popular  mind  into  greater  errors  than  even  the  theology 
of  the  poets.  A  misguided  fancy  was  bad  enough,  but 
the  misguided  philosophy  of  the  ancients  was  v,'orse.  The 
former  was  the  mother  of  superstition,  but  the  latter  of  the 
most  pernicious  skepticism.  Thus  the  popular  mind,  vi- 
brating between  the  two  extremes  of  superstition  and 
infidelity,  never  became  fixed  upon  the  great  truth  of  God 
as  the  Creator  of  the  world.  Thus,  erroneous  upon  the  first 
trutli  of  revelation,  there  was  no  limit  to  the  multiplication 
of  gods  representing  the  greatest  inconsistency  of  principle^ 
so  that  divinities  grew  in  number  as  the  world  became  older, 
and  were  more  corrupt  in  the  highest  civilization  than  even 
in  the  depths  of  savage  existence.  Thus,  while  on  the  one 
side  ignorance  was  the  parent  of  superstition,  upon  the  other 
side  knowledge  became  the  author  of  the  highest  refinement 
of  cruelty  and  corruption.  Thus,  had  it  not  been  for  the 
Jewish  theocracy,  the  world  would  have  lost  its  last  hope. 
But  upon  the  great  fact  of  the  creation  of  the  world  the  Mo- 
saic record  is  nrost  clear  and  authoritative.  Here  an  amount 
of  knowledge  is  communicated  vastly  surpassing  all  the  learn- 
ing of  paganism.  In  nothing  was  the  impotence  of  heathen 
philosophy  more  clearly  displayed  than  in  its  vain  attempt  to 
thread  its  way  through  the  ages  of  patriarchal  and  antedilu- 
vian times.     Here  science  and  poetry  and  history  threw  only 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  521 

faint  gleams  of  liglit,  that  seemed  but  to  make  more  palpa- 
ble the  darkness  that  involved  in  oblivion  the  early  ages  of 
the  world.  Bat  the  Mosaic  record,  by  briefly  communicat- 
ing the  fact  of  the  creation  and  the  fall  of  man,  at  one  stroke 
demolished  all  the  theories  of  pagan  theologers.  The  fall  of 
our  first  parents  is  the  only  key  that  explains  the  mystery  of 
human  corruption,  while  at  the  same  time  it  reveals  the 
necessity  of  the  direct  interposition  of  God  to  counteract  the 
inevitable  ruin  of  that  tall.  The  Hebrew  polity  revealed 
also  the  great  fact  that  the  worship  of  God,  the  purity  of 
his  service,  was  a  higher  end  than  state  expediency.  "With 
the  heathen,  religion  was  made  subservient  to  the  state; 
Hmong  the  Jews,  the  state  was  subservient  to  religion.  In  the 
Jewish  polity,  the  salvation  of  tlie  state,  its  noblest  develop- 
ment, its  highest  prosperity,  were  made  to  hang  upon  the 
purity  of  the  worship  of  God.  Thus,  the  Sabbath  to  be  kept 
holy  was  recognized  as  of  binding  obligation  upon  the 
people, — the  public  worship  of  God  was  to  be  strictly  ob- 
served,— the  ceremonial  law,  demanding  the  greatest  personal 
cleanliness  and  purity  of  sacritice,  was  in  ever}'  place  en- 
joined. The  priesthood  were  placed  above  a  slavish  depend- 
ence upon  the  caprice  of  the  multitude,  and  their  support 
was  a  duty  that  involved  the  very  existence  of  their  polity 
and  state.  The  state  in  its  very  existence  hung  upon  the 
obedience  of  God.  With  this  obedience  came  glory  and  pros- 
perity ;  without  it,  disgrace  and  ruin.  The  system  of  the 
Jewish  theocracy  was  designed  to  be  a  living  contrast  to 
heathenism  and  an  ever-present  rebuke  to  false  idols.  In 
the  land  of  Jndea  there  was  a  demonstration  to  be  made  of 
the  momentous  truth  that  the  worship  of  the  one  God  was 
an  end  immeasurably  superior  to  any  other  object.  What  was 
the  revelation  of  God  and  of  his  attributes  in  that  worship? 
First,  God  in  his  unity  was  made  known,  God  as  the  iniinite 
Father,  God  as  the  Creator,  God  as  transcendently  just  and 
good  and  merciful  and  forgiving  of  offenses, — God,  through 
the  institution  of  sacrifices,  as  making  known  a  way  of  re- 
demption for  the  sinner, — God  as  a  personal  agent, — God  in 
his  love  of  men  of  sincerity  and  truth,  of  men  liberal  and 


522  HISTORIC   OUTLINE   OF  THE 

kind  toward  strangers  and  charitable  to  the  poor, — God  in 
his  purity, — God  the  avenger  of  the  oppressed,  the  punisher 
of  the  sacrilegious  and  the  licentious, — God  in  his  greatness, 
his  omniscience,  omnipresence,  and  omnipotence.  Thus  the 
Hebrew  polity  was  not  more  singular  in  its  construction 
than  adapted  to  the  end  of  the  redemption  of  a  nation  and 
the  salvation  of  millions.  To  make  more  conspicuous  the 
personal  agency  and  character  of  the  true  God,  all  the  cir- 
cumstances connected  with  the  Jewish  state  were  such  as  to 
preclude  the  glory  of  man  or  the  arrogance  of  human  boast- 
ing. Small  in  territory,  surrounded  by  rival  or  hostile  com- 
munities, unwarlike  as  a  nation,  the  Jewish  state  was  con- 
lined  within  a  narrow  circle.  In  human  learning  it  was 
greatly  surpassed  by  heathen  nations.  Judea  was  not  the 
land  for  philosophy  or  for  science.  The  Jews  were  not  the 
warriors  of  the  earth.  Their  generals  led  no  great  armies  far 
oft'  into  tlie  remote  regions  of  Asia  or  Africa.  ISTo  Jewish 
legions  entered  the  wastes  of  Europe.  The  wars  of  the  Jews 
w^ere  wars  more  of  protection  than  of  aggression. 

The  chosen  people  were  confined  to  a  territory  compara- 
tively small.  It  was  the  purity  of  religious  worship,  the 
preservation  of  the  church,  for  which  the  whole  Hebrew 
polity  was  instituted.  The  glory  of  foreign  conquests,  the 
glitter  of  human  learning,  the  refinement  of  philosophy,  the 
beauties  of  statuary  or  painting,  the  magic  of  science,  did 
not  belong  to  the  Jewish  theocrac}'.  Why  not  ?  Evidently, 
because  the  whole  design  of  the  system  was  to  make  God 
everything  and  man  nothing.  It  was  to  show  the  immeas- 
urable superiority  of  the  true  worship  of  God  and  of  the  duties 
that  grow  from  his  service,  to  the  glitter  of  human  glory  or 
the  pride  of  human  art  or  learning.  What  was  the  result  ? 
Judea  was  a  moral  oasis  in  the  great  desert  of  the  world. 
In  spite  of  all  the  apostasy  of  the  Jews,  notwithstanding  their 
constant  declension  into  idolatry,  the  ancient  world  never 
saw  a  land  so  blessed  as  Palestine. 

AYhile  the  lust  of  conquest  swept  as  a  desolating  scourge 
over  the  earth,  while  war  brought  political  slavery  and  a  new- 
host  of  idols  in  its  train,  Judea  probably  enjoyed  a  higher 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  523 

degree  of  real  freedom  than  the  whole  world  besides.  Its 
law  enjoining  a  seven-years  jubilee  and  absolving  tlie  help- 
less from  degrading  bondage  had  in  it  more  of  true  liberty 
than  all  the  exaggerated  freedom  of  Greece  or  Rome.  With 
Greece  and  Rome,  state  considerations  were  everything, 
moral  considerations  nothing.  The  highest  virtue  was  patri- 
otism, or  obedience  to  the  state;  but  the  state  was  a  coalition 
of  idolatry  and  the  spirit  of  war.  The  one  held  a  sword 
over  the  soul,  the  other  over  the  body  ;  the  one  was  moral,  the 
other  military,  despotism.  But  in  Judea  servitude  died  out 
before  the  worship  of  God,  and  oppression  was  rebuked  the 
more  the  true  spirit  of  the  theocracy  was  cultivated.  In 
Athens  there  were  usually  from  ten  to  thirty  thousand  free- 
men ;  but  the  slaves  amounted  to  four  hundred  thousand,  and 
even  more.  The  freemen  of  Sparta  and  Rome  were  not 
more  numerous,  in  proportion  to  those  whom  they  held  in  a 
slavery  even  more  terrible  than  the  Athenian.  To  use  the 
language  of  Edmund  Burke,  "  The  free  states  never  formed, 
though  they  were  taken  all  together,  the  thousandth  part  of 
the  habitable  globe;  the  freemen  in  those  states  were  never 
the  twentieth  part  of  the  people;  and  the  time  they  subsisted 
is  scarce  anything  in  that  immense  ocean  of  duration  in 
which  time  are  so  nearly  commensurate.  Therefore,  call 
these  free  states,  or  popular  governments,  or  what  you  please, 
when  we  consider  the  majority  of  their  inhabitants  and 
regard  the  natural  rights  of  mankind,  they  must  appear 
in  reality  and  truth  no  better  than  pitiful  and  oppressive 
oligarchies." 

But  the  Hebrew  polity  was  not  more  eminently  favorable 
to  freedom  and  adapted  to  secure  the  highest  practicable 
civil  and  religious  liberty,  than  it  was  deeply  opposed  to  the 
common  crimes  of  the  heathen.  In  Sparta  infanticide  was 
enacted  by  law.  The  parent  in  Rome  had  absolute  con- 
trol of  the  life  of  his  children.  The  murder  of  children  was 
often  a  part  of  the  religious  worship  of  the  heathen.  The 
whole  system  of  paganism  is  pervaded  with  the  spirit  of 
cruelty  to  aged  parents  and  to  children,  and  also  with  the 
most  wide-spread  dissoluteness  of  manners.  When  cruelty  and 


524  HISTORIC   OUTLINE   OF   THE 

impurity  entered  into  the  very  heart  of  heathen  religion, 
what  must  have  been  the  corruption  engendered  among  the 
worshipers ! 

How  foreign  was  all  this  from  the  Jewish  code,  when 
the  professed  design  of  that  code  was  to  present  a  contrast 
as  great  as  possible  to  the  religion  and  manners  of  pagan 
nations  !  Thus,  we  read  the  language,  "  Delile  not  ye  your- 
selves in  any  of  these  things,  for  in  all  these  the  nations  are 
defiled  which  I  cast  out  before  you,  and  the  land  is  defiled  ; 
therefore  I  do  visit  the  iniquitj-  thereof  upon  it,  and  the  land 
itself  voniiteth  out  her  inhabitants."  "  Ye  shall  be  holy  unto 
me ;  for  I  the  Lord  thy  God  am  holy,  and  have  severed  you 
from  other  people  that  ye  should  be  mine." 

The  prevailing  spirit  of  the  Hebrew  literature  is  shown 
in  tlie  Scriptures  as  noble  and  pure.  Moses  was  not  a  law- 
giver only,  but  a  moralist.  Outward  obedience  to  law  was 
not  only  enjoined,  but  the  true  spirit  of  divine  law  was 
taught,  commanding  not  only  not  to  steal,  but  not  to  covet. 
A  good  state  of  mind  and  heart  was  enjoined,  as  much 
as  external  conformity  to  rulers.  The  Hebrew  literature 
and  history,  as  given  to  us  in  the  books  of  Moses  and  the 
writings  of  the  prophets  and  eminent  men  recorded  in  the 
Bible,  not  only  reveal  the  character  of  God  in  a  way  so  sen- 
sible and  plain  as  to  reach  every  understanding,  but  in  the 
way  that  is  best  adapted  to  give  us  grand  and  pure  concep- 
tions of  the  divine  nature  and  attributes.  Extending  over 
so  many  centuries,  composed  of  such  a  diversity  of  persons, 
one  would  imagine  that  all  unity  would  be  lost  and  errors 
innumerable  would  creep  in.  And  thus  it  would  be  were 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  7iot  inspired.  iS'ot  so.  Al- 
thougli  written  in  popular  language,  although  using  the  ut- 
most freedom  of  description,  there  exists  in  the  Bible  no  error 
in  science,  no  u.  worthy  conception  of  the  divine  character. 
God  is  revealed  not  in  the  abstract,  as  an  idea,  a  spiritual 
substance,  a  vague  First  Cause,  a  mere  originator  of  matter, 
or  the  first  order  or  law  of  things,  not  with  the  indefiniteness 
of  heathen  sages,  nor  yet  clothed  in  the  sensuous  dress  of 
poetic  genius.     But  he  is  everywhere  spoken  of  as  a  personal 


OLD    TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  525 

God;  be  is  delineated  in  all  the  vividness  of  actual  life,  feel- 
ing, thinking,  seeing,  knowing,  acting,  loving  all  good, 
liating  all  evil,  a  rewarder  of  righteousness,  an  avenger  of 
sin,  superintending  the  works  of  his  hands,  divinely  one  in 
his  substance,  infinitely  pure  and  good,  self-existing  from 
eternity,  one  Father  in  heaven,  and  one  omnipotent  King 
upon  earth.  What  if  pagan  nations  excelled  the  Jews  in 
mere  earthly  literature  or  learning?  what  if  Palestine  was 
despised  before  great  emperors  whose  dominion  extended 
over  the  remotest  regions  of  the  world  ?  what  if  the  glory 
of  arms  was  the  ruling  passion  of  the  nations  of  antiquity  ? 
what  if  battle-fields  and  the  blood  of  slaughtered  enemies 
were  the  highest  themes  of  poetic  praise?  what  if  Roman 
conquests  or  Grecian  statuary  and  painting  called  forth  the 
noblest  art  of  the  historian  ? — yet  Hebrew  literature,  sublimely 
great  in  its  theme,  majestic  with  the  fire  of  inspiration,  noble 
as  the  lofty  song  of  praise  that  echoed  within  the  walls  of  the 
consecrated  temple,  divinely  pure  and  grand  as  the  evening 
sky  trembling  all  over  with  starry  pulses  of  glory,  could  yet 
throw  into  the  shad-e  all  pagan  learning  and  art.  Before  the 
words  of  the  sacred  prophet  we  bow  the  knee  and  are 
silent: 

"  Thou,  0  God,  hast  laid  of  old  the  foundations  of  the 
earth,  and  the  heavens  are  the  work  of  thy  hands;  they  shall 
perish,  but  thou  shalt  endure;  yea,  all  of  them  shall  wax 
old  like  a  garment ;  as  a  vesture  shalt  thou  change  them, 
and  they  shall  be  changed ;  but  thou  art  the  same,  and  thy 
years  shall  have  no  end." 


CHAPTER   XX. 

HISTORIC    OUTLINE    OF   THE   NEW   TESTAMENT    THEOLOGY. 

All  history  reveals  the  great  fact  that  ther  revelation  of 
God  is  o:iven  in  the  most  appropriate  period  for  such  a  reve- 
lation. When  we  come  to  the  period  of  the  Christian  dispen- 
sation, we  come  to  a  state  of  the  world  very  different  from 
the  ages  that  preceded  it.  The  Roman  power  was  then  in 
its  glory.  It  was  in  the  Augustan  age  of  Rome  that  Christ 
our  Saviour  came  to  this  world.  It  was  in  the  fullness  of  time 
that  the  Son  of  God  became  incarnate  and  provided  a  way 
for  the  redemption  of  the  earth.  In  the  dream  of  N"ebu- 
chadnezzar  we  read  of  the  great  image  of  gold,  silver,  brass, 
and  iron,  symbolizing  four  leading  monarchies  of  the  world, 
— the  Babylonian,  the  Persian,  the  Grecian,  and  the  Roman. 
The  inspired  Daniel  portrayed,  before  the  monarch  of  famed 
Babylon,  the  destiny  of  those  kingdoms  that  were  to  succeed 
each  other  and  each  in  turn  ravage  the  earth.  First  came 
Babylon,  the  richest  nation  of  the  East.  Nebuchadnezzar, 
exulting  in  the  pride  of  his  power,  saw,  in  the  words  of  the 
prophet,  his  vast  dominion  pass  into  the  hands  of  Persia. 
Then  Persia,  with  her  gorgeous  pomp  and  servitude,  came 
under  the  brazen  sway  of  the  Grecians.  Then  Greece,  the 
land  of  philosophy  and  poetry,  fell  beneath  the  iron  rule  of 
Rome.  Here  were  four  great  powers,  each  to  succeed  the 
other  ;  each  was  to  exert  a  mighty  influence  over  the  world, 
and  each  at  last  was  to  be  conquered  by  the  power  that 
came  after  it.  But  there  was  a  fifth  power,  greater  than  all 
the  other  powers  put  together.  It  was  a  power  distinct  from 
the  powers  represented  by  the  gold,  silver,  brass,  and  iron  of 
the  image.  It  was  a  power  supernatural  in  its  origin,  sym- 
bolized by  a  stone  cut  out  without  hands,  which  smote  the 
(526) 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  527 

image  upon  his  feet,  that  were  of  iron  and  day,  and  broke 
them  to  pieces.  Looking  upon  the  historic  map  of  the 
world,  let  us  briefly  survey  those  four  great  powers  that 
were  ultimately  to  be  supplanted  by  the  fifth  power,  spoken 
of  in  the  prophetic  words,  "And  in  the  days  of  those  kings 
shall  the  God  of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom,  which  shall  never 
be  destroyed  ;  and  the  kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  other 
people,  but  it  shall  break  in  pieces  and  consume  all  these 
kingdoms,  and  it  shall  stand  forever."  Babylon,  the  pow- 
erful oppressor  of  the  Jews,  in  one  memorable  night  fell 
before  the  arms  of  Cyrus  the  Persian.  The  infatuated 
monarch,  at  a  great  festival,  had  left  the  gates  of  the  city 
open,  and  himself  and  his  lords  were  reveling  together 
when  a  mysterious  handwriting  upon  the  walls  of  the  palace 
made  his  knees  to  tremble,  and  foretold  the  immediate  ruin 
of  himself  and  his  kingdom.  Soon  the  city  was  captured  by 
the  Medes  and  Persians.  Less  than  two  hundred  years  after, 
the  general  profligacy  of  paganism,  the  wide-spread  dissipa- 
tion of  manners,  the  fruit  of  luxury  and  despotism,  and  the 
oppression  of  the  chosen  people,  hurried  on  the  ruin  of  the 
mighty  Persian  empire.  Alexander,  the  most  resistless  de- 
vastator the  world  has  ever  seen,  in  two  years  laid  the 
Persian  monarchy  even  with  the  ground.  But  the  empire 
of  the  Macedonian  soldier,  reared  by  ambition  and  blood, 
fell  in  fragments  on  his  grave.  Four  dynasties  divided  the 
power  of  Alexander ;  but  the  two  most  sanguinary  and  hostile 
to  Palestine  were  the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucidse,  the  sove- 
reigns of  Egypt  and  of  Syria.  From  the  division  of  the  Mace- 
donian empire  to  the  reign  of  Herod  Jerusalem  was  captured 
six  times  by  foreign  armies.  For  two  hundred  years  Judea 
witnessed  a  fearful  duration  of  misery  and  carnage.  Li  the 
language  of  Josephus,  "  The  Jews  resembled  a  ship  tossed 
by  a  hurricane  and  bufl'eted  on  both  sides  by  the  waves, 
while  they  lay  in  the  midst  of  contending  seas."  In  that 
century  events  of  transcendent  interest  were  crowded,  even 
the  birth,  life,  and  death  of  Christ,  the  promulgation  of  Chris- 
tianity, the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  final  ruin  of  the 
Jewish  nation.     But  the  Roman  power  that  then  triumphed 


528  HISTORIC   OUTLINE   OF   THE 

over  the  eartli  was  Ji  power  of  iron.  It  consolidated  in  one 
vast  empire  the  whole  civilized  earth.  It  extended  from  the 
Caucasus  to  Mauritania,  and  from  the  rising  to  the  setting 
of  the  sun.  Nothino-  could  withstand  the  colossal  streno-th 
of  the  Roman  legions.  Greece  overran  the  earth, — Rome 
conquered  it.  Rome  itself  was  but  a  military  camp,  vast, 
resistless,  and  unj'ielding.  "With  an  energy  undaunted  by 
the  greatest  obstacles,  the  Roman  armies  brought  under  their 
sway  the  remotest  regions  of  the  earth.  When  Christianity 
was  given  to  the  world,  the  Roman  empire  had  received  that 
form  of  government  which  was  best  adapted  to  its  universal 
diffusion.  It  was  a  government  that  had  the  energy  of  a 
republic  with  the  broad  ambition  of  a  monarchy.  Roman 
arms  introduced  civilization.  Hostile  nations  were  united 
under  one  vast  power.  The  science  and  literature  of  the 
conquered  were  welcomed  in  the  imperial  city.  Memorable 
was  that  general  peace  which  for  a  short  time,  in  the  reign 
of  Augustus  Csesar,  rested  upon  the  earth.  It  was  fitting 
that  the  Prince  of  Peace  should  come  at  a  time  when  the 
clash  of  arms  was  hushed,  and  belligerent  nations  took  a 
short  respite  befqre  the  world  was  again  to  be  given  up  to 
foreign  and  civil  violence.  Gently,  almost  unnoticed  and 
unknown,  did  the  fifth  power,  symbolized  by  the  stone  cut 
out  without  hands,  make  its  appearance. 

In  Bethlehem  of  Judea  there  was  born,  in  the  manger  of 
oxen,  an  infant.  The  shepherds,i  keeping  their  sheep  by 
night,  heard  the  song  of  the  angels,  and,  guided  by  a  star  of 
glory,  visited  the  little  stranger.  The  world's  Redeemer, 
heralded  by  angels,  came  in  poverty,  obscurity,  and  want. 
In  a  Roman  palace  there  sat  a  dark-minded  man.  Restlessly 
did  Herod  ponder  over  the  prophetic  intimations  of  the  mys- 
terious king  who  was  to  come.  The  public  mind  was  awake. 
The  wise  men  of  the  land  were  looking  for  some  great  event. 
The  suspicious  Herod  issues  his  decree.  There  is  weeping 
with  the  mothers  of  Bethlehem.  The  savage  command  had 
had  gone  forth  and  spent  its  force  in  vain.  The  parents 
depart  with  the  young  child  into  Egypt,  and  there  for  thirty 
years  dwells  the  Son  of  God.    The  time  of  his  public  mission 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  529 

commences.  For  three  years  he  becomes  the  great  teacher 
of  his  countrymen.  He  works  miracles  to  prove  his  divinity. 
He  speaks  the  word,  and  the  dead  are  raised.  He  heals  the 
blind.  The  ears  of  the  deaf  are  opened.  The  lepers  are 
cleansed,  and  the  lame  are  made  whole.  The  sick  in  a  mo- 
ment are  restored  to  health.  He  walks  upon  the  waves  of  the 
sea.  The  winds  obey  his  voice.  Christ,  onr  Saviour,  was  tlie 
world's  creditor,  but  the  world  knew  liim  not.  His  disciples 
that  followed  liim  misunderstood  him.  He  was  despised  and 
rejected  of  men.  But  before  his  wisdom  human  malice  stood 
abashed.  Enemies  innumerable  surrounded  his  path.  The 
chief  priests  and  scribes  seek  his  death.  Before  tlie  Roman 
governor  he  is  brought.  The  multitude  cry  out,  "  N'ot  this 
man,  but  Barabbas  !"  A  slavish  fear  stifles  the  sentiment  of 
humanity  and  justice  in  Pilate.  Christ  is  crucitied  between 
two  thieves.  Hours  big  witli  the  destiny  of  the  worlA  roll 
on.  The  last  moment  comes.  The  words,  "  it  is  finished" 
fall  from  the  lips  of  Jesus.  The  battle  is  fought  and  won. 
Christ  is  laid  in  the  grave.  In  three  days  he  breaks  from  the 
bondage  of  the  tomb.  Death  is  conquered.  Our  Saviour 
ascends  to  God  his  Father,  and  now  begin  the  great  victories 
of  the  kingdom  of  the  stone. 

In  the  survey  of  the  early  prophetic  developments  of  the 
kingdom  of  the  stone  that  was  to  appear  during  the  exist- 
ence of  the  four  great  powers  of  the  earth,  and  destined  to 
break  in  pieces  and  consume  all  these  kingdoms,  and  to 
stand  forever,  let  us  contemplate  two  things  as  revealing 
God  and  his  attributes  : 

1st.  What  is  Christianity'  ? 

2d.  What  is  the  relation  it  sustains  to  the  world,  and  its 
ultimate  condition  in  the  world  ? 

"  The  true  conception  of  Christianity,"  says  Croly,  "  is  not 
that  of  a  new  religion,  but  of  an  old  receiving  a  more  perfect 
form ;  the  seed  ph^^ted  in  the  day  of  Abraham,  shut  up  but 
maturing  in  the  day  of  Judah,  and  shooting  above  the  earth 
in  the  day  of  Christ ;  the  primal  faith,  buried  in  weakness  to 
be  raised  in  power  ;  the  body  laid  in  the  grave  with  the 
patriarchal   dispensation ;    the    spirit    existing,  but   separate 

34 


530  HISTORIC    OUTLINE   OF  THE 

and  viewless,  in  the  Mosaic  ;  the  spirit  and  body  reunited, 
with  more  vivid  attributes,  a  nobler  shape,  and  a  perpetual 
existence,  in  the  Christian.  Tlie  apostles  continually  declare 
this  identity  of  principle  with  the  religion  of  Abraham. 
They  claim  expressly  under  the  Abrahamic  covenant.  St. 
Paul,  alternately  astonished  at  the  dullness  and  indignant 
at  the  prejudice  which  could  doubt  that  he  himself  was  a 
champion  of  the  true  national  religion,  cries  out,  '  For  the 
hope  of  Israel  am  I  bound  with  this  chain.'  He  unhesi- 
tatingly accounts  for  the  reluctance  of  the  Jews  to  adopt 
Christianity,  not  on  ground  that  they  were  wedded  to  the 
religion  of  Abraham,  but  that  they  had  substituted  another 
in  its  place ;  and  loftily  denies  their  claim  to  the  very  title 
of  Israelite:  'all  are  not  Israel  that  are  of  Israel.'  Peter, 
like  the  preachers  of  righteousness  in  the  days  before  the 
flood;- warns  the  Jews  of  the  ruin  which  is  the  inevitable 
consequence  of  their  ajwstasy  from  the  primal  faith;  and  our 
Lord  himself,  in  the  most  distinct,  detailed,  and  impressive 
declaration  of  divine  wrath  ever  given,  first  charges  the 
people  with  revolt  from  the  spirit  of  this  faith,  and  then  pro- 
nounces the  coming  of  that  deluge  of  Afc  and  sword  which 
was  to  extirpate  the  being  of  the  nation  as  the  result  of  the 
crime." 

Thus,  it  will  be  seen  that  Christianity  in  its  spirit  was  es- 
sentially the  same  with  the  religion  of  the  patriarchal  and 
Mosaic  dispensations.  But  in  what  respects  did  it  difl'er? 
Just  as  the  full  development  of  a  tree  differs  from  its  infency 
and  early  youth;  just  as  the  body  of  the  child  difiJers  from 
the  maturity  of  a  man.  The  primal  faith  had  existed  from 
the  fall ;  it  lived  in  the  hearts  of  the  good  of  antediluvian 
times;  it  inspired  the  devotions  of  the  early  patriarchs;  it 
assumed  a  national,  visible  form  in  the  Mosaic  economj-;  it 
took  upon  itself  a  more  glorious  shape  in  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation. Old  as  the  world,  it  called^upon  man  in  every 
age  to  recognize  the  great  truth  of  God  infinite  in  justice, 
goodness,  and  mercy.  But  in  the  Christian  dispensation 
gleams  of  vivid  light  revealed  God  not  only  in  his  unity, 
but  in  the  threefold  existence  of  his  unity.    God  the  Father, 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  531 

God  the  Son,  and  God  the  Eternal  Spirit  were  tlie  three 
personal  agents  made  known  in  the  vast  system  of  redemp- 
tion; a  mystery  explaining  the  deep  secrets  of  the  moral  uni- 
verse, yet  most  unexplained  in  itself. 

Thus  the  Christian  was  called  upon  to  recognize,  in  his 
salvation,  three  personal  agents, — the  Father,  the  Redeemer, 
the  Sanctifier,  unity  in  trinity,  trinity  in  unity.  It  was  the 
glory  of  the  New  Testament  to  unfold  the  system  of  re- 
demption so  as  to  meet  the  wants  of  all  ages  and  all  classes, 
so  as  to  reveal  God  in  his  attributes  of  mercy,  condescension, 
compassion  and  love,  in  a  way  impossible  by  the  light  of 
nature.  God  incarnate  in  Christ  was  that  mystery  of  myste- 
ries that  upheaved  the  foundations  of  the  old  world,  changed 
the  wdiole  aspect  of  society,  gave  to  man  the  security  of  a 
happy  immortality,  and  disarmed  death  of  its  dread  sting. 
The  cross  became  the  hope  of  millions.  An  empire  was 
founded  before  whose  victories  the  exploits  of  Alexander 
or  Csesar  became  infinitely  insignificant. 

Thus,  the  religion  of  Christ  embodied  in  it  every  truth 
known  before,  with  truths  peculiarly  its  own.  It  spoke  of 
the  world  to  come  in  its  spirituality  and  its  happiness,  of  the 
resurrection,  and  the  judgment.  But  Christianity  in  its  na- 
ture was  universal,  and  not  local.  It  was  not  a  religion  pe- 
culiarly for  the  Jew,  but  a  religion  as  much  for  the  Gentile 
as  the  Jew,  a  religion  that  comprehended  the  world.  .Its 
very  forms  were  simple,  adapted  for  all  ages  and  nations. 
Its  whole  spirit  was  fitted  for  the  moral  elevation  of  man, 
calling  forth  the  exercise  of  every  virtue,  and  making  the 
heart  no  less  happy  than  good.  But  Christianity  was  also 
the  noblest  development  of  moral  freedom.  So  clearly  did 
it  teach  the  relations  of  man  to  man,  and  of  man  to  God, 
that  its  reception  into  the  heart  emancipated  the  conscience 
and  redeemed  the  soul.  It  brought  with  it  the  restoration 
of  man.  By  making  supreme  the  authority  of  God,  and 
infallible  the  declarations  of  his  word,  it  eft'ectually  delivered 
the  conscience  from  the  tyranny  of  man. 

Thus,  the  gospel,  wherever  it  made  progress,  and  just  so 
far  as  it  was  welcomed  in  its  purity,  laid  a  foundation  for 


532  HISTORIC  OUTLIXE   OF  THE 

true  libert}'  such  as  tlie  world  had  never  before  seen.  It 
was  not  in  Jerusalem  that  God  only  was  to  be  worshiped, 
it  was  not  alone  to  the  chosen  people  that  Christ  came  upon 
his  mission  of  love.  Wide  as  the  world  were  to  be  the  tri-* 
umphs  of  the  cross,  boundless  as  the  wants  of  man  were 
to  be  the  blessings  of  the  gospel.  Consequently,  there 
was  the  development  of  a  power  immeasurably  superior  to 
Roman  arms.  It  came  in  direct  collision  with  the  iron  sway 
of  the  fourth  kingdom.  Its  war  was  personal  with  pagan 
idolatry.  It  entered  into  no  compromise  with  the  tyranny 
and  impurity  of  superstition.  It  was  death  to  civil  and  reli- 
gious despotism. 

Thus  a  divine  force  was  revealed, — a  power  that  trampled 
into  the  dust  the  altar  and  the  throne  of  paganism,  a  power 
that  hurled  defiance  at  the  whole  pantheon  of  heathen  gods. 
Judaism  was  local,  and  could  not  call  forth  the  same  hostility 
of  superstition  ;  Christianity  was  universal,  and  essentially 
aggressive.  Consequently,  superstition  and  Christianity  could 
not  live  together.  The  triumph  of  one  was  the  death  of  the 
other.  The  world  had  either  to  exterminate  Christianity  or 
to  corrupt  it.  It  could  not  exist  in  its  purity  in  alliance  with 
superstition.  Hence  the  reason  for  its  hatred,  and  those  fierce 
battles  that  were  fought  to  stay  its  progress.  Christianity  is 
especially  to  man  the  highest  development  of  the  character 
of  God.  Christ  was  God  manifest  in  the  flesh;  his  humanity 
shot  forth  vivid  gleams  of  light  that  unveiled  the  heart  of  the 
Deity  himself.  The  disclosures  of  truth  are  far  greater  in  the 
New  than  in  the  Old  Testament.  Christ  impersonated  the 
virtues  of. God.  In  him  purity,  love,  compassion,  truth,  were 
divinely  embodied.  The  virtues  of  Christ  were  virtues  sub- 
jected to  the  severest  trials,  virtues  godlike  and  infinite. 
The  character  of  God  was  represented  to  man  so  sensibly 
that  Christ  himself  was  declared  to  be  the  express  image  of 
the  Father.  In  him  was  a  revelation  of  goodness  such  alone 
as  reigns  in  the  heart  of  God.  In  him  was  mercy  delineated 
such  as  God  alone  could  manifest.  In  him  was  love  expressed 
whose  depth  was  infinite, — love  boundless  as  the  great  ocean 
of  eternity,    love  vast   as   the    universe,    love    not  only  re- 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  533 

vealed  in  glory,  not  only  resplendent  upon  its  throne  of 
dominion,  love  not  only  grand  as  heralded  by  angels  and 
sweet  as  the  music  of  heaven's  choir,  but  love  in  suffering, 
love  groaning  beneath  the  terrors  of  divine  law,  love  ex- 
piring upon  the  cross,  love  resting  itself  in  the  grave  of 
man.  Here  was  a  development  of  God  such  as  the  world 
had  never  before  seen, — a  development  of  God  in  his  conde- 
scension, whose  myster}^  the  angels  desire  to  look  into.  It  is 
not  abstract  virtue,  but  impersonated  virtue,  that  most  moves 
the  heart  of  man  ;  virtue  sensible,  virtue  in  action,  virtue  in 
trial,  virtue  a  living  embodiment  of  thought,  feeling,  pur- 
pose, will,  and  afiection.  Such  was  the  virtue  of  Christ; 
such,  in  Christ,  is  the  image  of  the  Father.  Thus  the  attri- 
butes of  God,  through  Christ,  are  revealed  with  a  distinct- 
ness such  as  most  sensibly  to  influence  the  mind  of  man. 
As  accountable  beings,  the  knowledge  of  the  moral  attributes 
of  God  is  inconceivably  more  valuable  than  the  knowledge 
of  his  moral  attributes.  The  knowledge  of  God  made  known 
to  us  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  is  to  us  of  the  highest 
possible  importance.  In  the  inspired  oracles  all  the  light  of 
nature  is  confirmed,  and  in  addition  to  that  light  there  is  a 
development  of  the  character  of  God  that  affects  our  condi- 
tion for  two  worlds.  It  is  not  the  fact  that  the  Bible  reveals 
life  and  immortality  to  man,  that  makes  it  a  gift  of  the  noblest 
value,  but  it  is  because  God,  in  our  relation  to  him,  is  there 
shown  to  us  in  the  threefold  office  of  Father,  Redeemer,  and 
Sanctifier.  It  is  not  because  heaven  is  unveiled  resplendent 
in  purity  and  glory,  but  because  a  way  is  showni  to  us  by  which 
we  may  reach  heaven.  It  is  not  because  divine  justice  is  seen 
with  sanctions  vast  as  the  universe,  and  law  comprehensive 
as  God  himself,  but  because  an  atonement  for  sin  is  provided 
which,  through  faith  in  the  great  Mediator,  can  save  unto  the 
uttermost  those  who  believe  and  repent  of  sin. 

What,  then,  is  the  relation  Christianity  sustains  to  the 
world,  and  what  its  ultimate  condition  in  the  world  ?  Chris- 
tianity, in  its  origin,  nature,  power,  and  success,  involves  in 
its  existence  the  noblest  development  of  God  and  his  attri- 
butes.    It  is  Christianity  that  gives  peculiar  brightness,  as 


534  HISTORIC    OUTLINE   OF   THE 

well  as  distinctness,  to  the  moral  character  of  God.  Let  us, 
then,  consider  the  relation  Christianity  sustains  to  the  world, 
and  its  ultimate  condition  in  the  world.  Christianity  and 
the  world  lying  in  sin  are  antagonistic  forces.  The  one  is 
natural,  the  other  supernatural  ;  the  one  is  temporal,  tlie 
other  spiritual.  IIow,  then,  is  Christianity  to  exist  in  the 
world?  It  can  only  exist  by  the  subjugation  to  itself  of 
the  world.  Two  powers  so  opposite  in  their  nature  can 
never  coalesce.  Does  not  the  prophetic  history  of  the 
four  kingdoms  of  the  earth  coming  in  contact  with  the  fifth 
kingdom  of  the  stone,  reveal  this  ?  How  can  two  forces 
so  opposite  in  their  character  and  manifestation  unite  ? 

The  relation,  then,  Christianity  sustains  to  the  world  must 
be  the  relation  of  hostility  to  the  development  of  all  sin.  But 
sin  develops  itself  in  the  individual  and  collectively  in  the  na- 
tion. It  is  revealed  in  the  person,  and  in  the  mass  the  aggre- 
gate of  persons.  Its  action  is  twofold,  forgetfulness  of  God 
and  evil  toward  man;  the  heart  wrong  with  the  Deity  and 
wrong  with  our  fellow-men.  The  external  development  of  sin 
toward  God  is  shown  in  fiilse  religions  and  no  religion,  in 
superstition  and  infidelity.  The  former  includes  the  endless 
forms  of  delusion  by  which  the  conscience  is  bound,  the 
liberty  of  the  soul  encroached  upon,  and  the  open  vices  of 
impurity,  cruelty,  and  religious  slavery  deified.  Superstition 
inverts  all  moral  distinctions.  It  degrades  virtues  into  vices, 
and  exalts  vices  into  virtues.  But  infidelity,  in  throwing  off 
the  shackles  of  superstition,  throws  off  also  all  subordination 
to  God.  It  acknowledges  no  God  to  control  the  life,  and  to 
whose  obedience  the  heart  should  submit.  Its  highest  au- 
thority is  itself.  Its  only  idol  is  the  uncontrolled  gratification 
of  its  desires.  Thus,  both  superstition  and  infidelity  embody 
those  sins  that  make  war  directly  with  the  supreme  authority 
of  God  ;  both  result  in  man's  highest  ruin,  while  each  secures 
it  in  a  different  way.  Superstition  undeifies  the  Creator; 
infidelity  deifies  the  creature.  Superstition  drags  God  down 
to  the  low  level  of  man  and  even  to  the  beasts  that  perish; 
infidelity  arrogates  for  man  that  which  only  God  can  have. 
Superstition  dwells  in  low  marshes  and  stagnant  pools  where 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY.  535 

a  deadly  miasma  perpetually  ascends;  infidelity  makes  its 
home  in  frozen  regions  where  all  life  and  vegetation  die  oat. 
Superstition  is  the  nurse  of  ignorance  and  sensuality;  infi- 
delity of  presumption  and  pride.  Superstition  enchains  the 
reason ;  infidelity  maddens  it.  The  one  reduces  human 
nature  to  abject  servility ;  the  other  drives  it  into  senseless 
arrogance.  Superstition  erects  its  throne  upon  the  conscience 
blind  and  brutish;  infidelity,  upon  the  conscience  conceited 
and  foolish.  The  one  refuses  to  exercise  the  reason  God  has 
given  to  man  ;  the  other  refuses  to  submit  the  reason  where 
alone  reason  can  become  reasonable. 

What  is  especially  the  development  of  sin  toward  man  ? 
Sin  exists  under  all  those  forms  of  vice  toward  man  that 
conscience  so  instinctively  pronounces  to  be  wrong.  Thus,  it' 
reveals  itself  in  oppression-,  in  envy,  hatred,  malice,  avarice, 
wastefuhiess,  and  all  unlawful  gratification  of  the  appetites 
and  the  passions.  Must  not  Christianity,  then,  be  at  war 
with  all  the  developments  of  sin  ?  Must  it  not  in  its  influ- 
ence be  a  spiritual  power,  creating  in  man  a  true  recognition 
of  God,  and  a  true  love  to  man  ?  Must  it  not  be  an  agency 
bringing  the  world,  wherever  it  exists,  into  harmony  with 
God,  and  the  obedience  of  virtue?  But  its  ultimate  condi- 
tion in  the  world  can  only  be  known  by  the  revelation  of  God 
to  man.  Is  the  Bible  such  a  revelation?  Then  the  ques- 
tion is  settled:  admit  its  truth, — admit  that  it  gives  to  us  a 
higher  manifestation  of  the  character  of  God,  his  moral 
government,  and  the  purposes  of  his  scheme  of  redemption 
than  the  light  of  nature  can  or  does  make  known, — admit 
that  history  confirms  its  great  facts,  that  Christianity  is  a 
divine  reality, — and  at  once  we  must  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  final  triumph  of  Christianity  is  certain;  just  as 
certain  as  the  word  of  God. 

Let,  then,  the  world  roll  on, — let,  like  the  raging  sea,  the 
nations  be  troubled, — let  nature  open  her  storehouse  of 
tempests  and  the  elements  be  confounded  together.  Yet  the 
war  shall  not  be  forever.  Freedom  shall  not  alwa3's  groan  in 
chains,  or  the  altars  of  superstition  be  red  with  blood.  Infi- 
delity shall  not  forever  scourge  the  earth,  nor  despotism  crush 


536  HISTOBIC   OUTLINE,  ETC. 

the  nations  into  the  dust.  God  maj^  not  constantly  be  for- 
gotten in  his  works,  nor  the  creature  be  deilied  at  the  expense 
of  the  Creator.  The  tifth  kingdom  is  to  stand  forever,  its  power 
is  never  to  end.  The  cross  must  yet  triumph  over  pagan 
lands,  and  Christianity  reign  from  pole  to  pole.  ISTature  is 
yet  to  reveal  with  greater  loveliness  the  power  of  God,  and 
earth  to  smile  with  the  nobler  beauty  of  his  wisdom.  The 
moral  excellence  of  God  is  yet  to  tiasli  with  brighter  light 
from  the  sacred  page,  and  God  in  his  goodness  is  to  be  made 
known  with  far  more  vivid  clearness.  Nature  and  revelation 
shall  then  unite  with  greater  glory  their  beams  of  light,  and 
both  shall  speak  of  the  mercy  of  God  to  man  forever. 

Then  with  truth,  in  the  significant  words  of  Giliillan,  it 
can  be  said  that  "  the  prophecies  of  all  genuine  poets  since 
the  world  began  shall  have  a  living  fultillmeut  in  the  general 
countenance  and  heart  of  man.  Nor  shall  the  spirit  of 
progress  and  aspiring  change  be  extinct.  To  meet  the  new 
discoveries  below,  and  the  new  stars  and  constellations  flash- 
ing dov/n  always  from  the  inflnite  above,  or  drawing  nearer, 
or  becoming  brighter  in  the  mystic  dance  of  the  heavens, 
men's  minds  must  arise  in  sympathy  and  brighten  in  unison. 
Who  shall  picture  what  the  state  of  society,  and  what  the 
progress  of  human  souls,  at  that  astronomical  era  when  the 
Cross  shall  shine  in  our  southern  heaven,  and  the  Lyre  shall 
include  our  polar  star  amid  its  burning  strings  ?  Must  there 
not  then  break  forth  from  our  orb  a  voice  of  song,  holier 
than  Amphion's,  sweeter  than  all  Orphean  measures,  compar- 
able to  that  fabled  melody  by  which  the  spheres  were  said  to 
attune  their  motions  ;  comparable  say  rather  to  that  nobler 
song  wherewith  when  earth,  a  stranger,  first  appeared  in  the 
sky,  she  was  saluted  by  the  morning  stars  singing  together, 
and  all  the  sons  of  God  shouting  for  joy  ?" 


CHAPTER    XXL 

THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF    SKEPTICISM. 

It  is  wise  to  inquire  of  any  system  of  skepticism  that  dis- 
cards the  Bible,  what  it  proposes  as  a  substitute  for  Christi- 
anity. 

The  Bible  comes  to  us  embodying  a  religion  of  facts^  a 
statement  not  only  of  principles,  but  of  events,  based  upon 
the  authority  of  God,  with  those  evidences  that  invite  our 
investigation  and  challenge  our  belief.  It  has  been  seen  that 
man  as  an  intellectual  and  moral  being,  as  possessing  con- 
science, reason,  and  affections,  has  certain  wants  in  his  na- 
ture, as  in  his  body,  that  demand  their  appropriate  food. 
Those  spiritual  wants  demand,  like  the  body,  that  which 
shall  satisfy  them,  that  which  shall  till  the  vast  capacity  of 
the  human  heart,  and  heal  the  moral  disease  that  sin  has  in- 
troduced into  the  soul.  The  Bible  comes  to  man  professing 
to  be  a  divine  remedy,  and  giving  the  credentials  of  its  heav- 
enly origin.  It  consists  of  two  divisions :  that  which  per- 
tains to  theology  or  to  belief,  and  that  which  is  comprehended 
in  ethics  or  practice.  It  teaches  us  first  what  we  are  to 
believe,  and  then  what  we  are  to  do. 

What,  then,  is  the  relation  that  the  Bible  sustains  to  hu- 
man reason  ?  Here  is  the  point  at  which  skepticism  enters 
upon  its  diverging  road  ;  here  commences  the  issue  between 
infidelity  and  Christianity.  The  ground  taken  in  the  Bible 
in  relation  to  human  reason  is  simply  this:  here  are  certain 
facts  in  respect  to  God,  liis  moral  government,  and  a  system 
of  redemption,  and  certain  facts  in  relation  to  man,  his 
past,  present,  and  future  condition;  and  here  are  the  evi- 
dences to  show  that  what  the  Bible  demands  as  necessary 
to  believe  and  practice  are  not  only  true,  but  have  a  divine 
sanction.     What  the  Bible  demands  of  human  reason  is,  that 

(537) 


538  THE  DIFFICULTIES 

those  evidences  to  show  it  from  God  should  be  carefully  ex- 
amined and  treated  with  candor.  For  this  purpose  the  Bible 
presents  its  varied  kinds  of  evidence  to  every  faculty  of  the 
mind  and  every  susceptibility  of  the  nature.  The  question 
it  puts  to  the  reason  is,  Do  not  these  evidences  prove  the 
Scriptures  divine?  Can  adaptation,  prophecy,  miracles,  the 
truth  of  Christ's  mission  from  God,  be  denied?  Can  its 
moral  excellence,  its  suitableness  for  the  everyday  duties  of 
life,  be  questioned  ? 

The  province  of  reason,  then,  is  to  examine  the  credentials 
of  the  Bible,  to  decide  the  question  of  their  genuineness,  to 
come  to  a  definite  conclusion  whether  one  or  all  of  them  do 
not  show  the  Scriptures  to  be  from  God.  In  connection  with 
human  reason  is  the  conscience,  whose  duty  it  is  to  decide 
upon  the  right  or  wrong  of  things.  The  fact  that  the  evi- 
dences of  the  Bible  appeal  to  the  conscience  is  a  proof  of  its 
riffhtness,  of  its  harmony  w^ith  virtue  and  all  moral  excel- 
lence.  The  only  question,  then,  to  decide  is,  Does  not  the 
Bible  give  sufficient  evidence  to  prove  it  from  God?  Can 
the  reason  and  the  conscience  deny  the  varied  arguments  to 
prove  the  Bible  from  God  ?  Eemember,  every  evidence  the 
Bible  presents  to  the  mind  to  show  it  from  God  must  be  re- 
ceived or  shown  false.  If  the  skeptic  denies  the  evidences, 
his  reason  must  be  good  for  that  denial;  he  must  show  that 
his  objections  are  sufficient  to  authorize  the  rejection  of  the 
Bible.  K  he  cannot  thus  do,  if  the  evidences  are  valid  to 
prove  the  Bible  the  word  of  God,  then  the  question  is  settled. 
All  that  reason  has  to  do  is  to  believe  and  submit. 

For  the  reason  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  the  facts  of  revela- 
tion, to  object  to  this  or  that  event  or  statement  on  account 
of  the  incomprehensible,  the  mysterious,  or  the  difficult  con- 
nected with  those  facts,  while  the  Bible  is  confessed  to  be 
from  God,  shows  not  merely  presumption,  but  absurdity'. 
What  is  the  course  the  Bible  takes  with  the  reason,  and  the 
relation  it  sustains  to  it?  It  presents  the  credentials  of  its 
divine  authority,  demands  their  examination  by  the  reason 
and  conscience,  and  then,  upon  the  ground  of  the  validitj'  of 
its  claims,  requii'es  that  its  facts  should  be  believed  in  and 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  539 

its  duties  practiced.  Is  it  not  right  that  God  should  say 
what  he  pleases,  and  reasonable  that  man,  when  good  evi- 
dence is  given,  should  believe  what  is  said  ?  The  question 
is  not,  Are  we  to  believe  in  what  we  cannot  understand?  but, 
Should  not  facts  recorded  in  the  Bible  be  believed  in,  what- 
ever may  be  the  mystery  connected  with  those  facts  ?  Here 
it  is  that  skepticism  dissents  from  a  proposition  so  plain.  It 
takes  the  ground  that  the  reason  should  decide  not  only 
upon  the  evidences  of  a  divine  revelation,  but  upon  the /ads 
of  a  divine  revelation.  It  assumes  that  reason  should  pass 
judgment  upon  every  Bible  fact,  and  receive  or  reject  every 
recorded  fact  according  as  it  suits  the  reason  or  does  not  suit 
it.  What  is  the  result  ?  The  ground  of  infallibility  is 
shifted  at  once  from  revelation  to  reason.  It  is  not  revela- 
tion that  is  infallible,  but  reason ;  not  the  facts  of  the  Bible 
that  are  to  be  received,  but  the  philosophy  of  those  facts 
that  must  be  inquired  into.  Instead  of  reason  submitting  to 
the  standard  of  the  Bible,  the  Bible  must  submit  to  the 
standard  of  reason.  What  it  approves  of  is  true,  what  it 
does  not  approve  of  is  false.  What  it  likes  is  to  be  received, 
what  it  dislikes  rejected.  Consequently,  the  only  authoi-ity 
to  be  relied  upon  is  the  reason.  Instead  of  the  Bible  being 
a  guide  to  the  reason,  the  reason  is  a  guide  to  the  Bible.  It 
is  the  judge  not  only  of  the  evidences,  but  even  of  the  facts, 
of  the  Bible,  and  this  book  before  the  reason  must  assume 
the  same  attitude  as  any  uninspired  production.  Skepticism, 
commencing  with  this  fundamental  error,  is  compelled,  how- 
ever reluctant,  into  another. 

Human  reason  being  the  only  infallible  authority,  and  as- 
suming to  sit  in  judgment  upon  the  facts  of  revelation  with 
their  philosophy,  it  follows  that  every  man's  reason  as  to 
what  should  be  believed  and  practiced  in  the  Bible  is  his 
own  exclusive  master  and  sole  authority.  Thus,  after  shift- 
ing the  infallibility  of  the  Scriptures  to  human  reason,  it 
gives  no  better  rule  of  judgment  than  the  endless  diversities 
of  every  man's  reason.  Every  difference  of  opinion  is  right 
if  the  reason  thinks  so,  and  to  be  believed  in  if  the  reason 
assents  to  it.     One  man  rejects  this  fact  because  of  its  mys- 


540  THE  DIFFICULTIES 

tery,  another  that  statement  on  account  of  its  incomprehen- 
sibility. This  precept  is  absurd  because  it  does  not  suit  the 
feelings,  and  that  command  of  God  is  unsuitable  because  of 
its  harshness.  Thus,  instead  of  the  Bible  regulating  our 
feelings  and  reason,  they  must  both  be  called  upon  to  regu- 
late the  Bible.  It  is  not  enough  that  the  Bible  gives  evi- 
dences to  prove  it  from  God  to  the  reason  and  the  conscience, 
but  reason  must  also  decide,  even  upon  recorded  facts,  what 
are  to  be  received  and  what  rejected. 

Consider,  now,  the  difhculties  skepticism  brings  upon  itself 
when  it  assumes  this  standard.  By  elevating  reason  above  its 
sphere^  it  degrades  it  in  its  sphere.  When  reason  submits  to 
revelation,  both  move  together  harmoniously.  Reason  linds 
in  revelation  an  infallible  guide  upon  subjects  of  the  deepest 
value  to  '  human  interests.  Revelation  comes  to  reason  as  a 
friend  ;  it  urges  it  to  walk  in  that  way  that  secures  its  lasting 
benefit.  Thus  united  in  one  boiid  of  friendship,  reason 
becomes  ennobled,  it  enlars-es  itself  to  its  i>:lorious  teachings, 
and  grows  wise  unto  salvation ;  but  in  the  other  case  reason 
becomes  of  necessity  the  enemy  of  revelation.  They  are  at 
issue  upon  a  vital  point.  Reason  demands  of  revelation  that 
which  it  will  not  submit  to,  and  revelation  demands  of  reason 
that  which  it  rejects.  What  is  the  consequence  ?  As  God's 
word  is  greater  than  human  reason,  so  in  a  drawn  battle 
between  the  two  the  weaker  side  must  be  crushed.  Here  is 
the  issue.  The  Bible  will  not  go  down  to  the  level  of  the 
reason,  and  the  reason  will  not  come  up  to  the  standard  of 
the  Bible.  Revelation  will  not  be  the  servant  of  reason,  nor 
reason  the  servant  of  revelation.  Consequentl}',  all  the 
blessings  of  a  revelation,  from  God  must  be  lost  to  the 
reason.  What  are  the  benefits  skepticism  secures  by  such  an 
unnatural  warfare?  It  is  proper  that  after  it  presumes  to  be 
wiser  than  revelation  it  should  show  its  superiority^  by  the 
greater  blessings  it  bestows.  What  are  those  blessings? 
One  is,  every  man  should  believe  Avhat  facts  of  the  Bible  he 
thinks  best,  and  perform  what  duties  he  pleases.  Our  reason 
is  our  only  infallible  standard,  and  if  it  blows  every  day 
round  the  compass,  we  must  go  with  it.     Thus  does  skepti- 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  541 

cism  force  ns  upon  a  boundless  sea  of  uncertainty  and  doubt. 
Reason,  throwing,  like  a  mad  mariner,  the  chart  and  compass 
overboard,  floats  upon  the  waters  at  the  mercy  of  every  gale, 
and  exposed  to  every  quicksand  and  rock.  What,  then,  does 
skepticism  gain  b}'  making  a  Lucifer  out  of  reason  and 
exalting  it  into  a  god  ?  Having  seated  itself  upon  the  throne 
of  revelation,  what  good  does  it  secure  to  reason  b}'  thus 
pampering  its  pride  ?  Here  is  sin,  with  its  countless  evils,  in 
the  world.  Here  is  conscience,  accusing  of  sin.  Here  are 
the  upbraidings  of  remorse  and  the  exposure  to  punishment. 
Let  the  reason  of  the  skeptic  assure  us  how  w^e  may  escape 
punishment,  avert  all  evils,  and  secure  our  highest  welfare  in 
this  world  and  the  next.  But  can  he  do  it?  Alas!  while 
reason  rejects  the  Bible,  it  has  no  ark  to  save  us  from  the 
deluge.  Flying  from  revealed  to  natural  religion,  it  loses  all 
the  benefits  of  the  former  and  secures  no  certainty  in  the 
latter.  Driven  over  a  wild  ocean  of  doubt,  it  is  tossed  by 
every  billow,  only  to  be  engulfed  when  hope  expires  and 
happiness  finds  an  eternal  grave.  The  greatest  difficulty  of 
skepticism  is,  it  makes  no  provision  for  the  highest  want  of 
our  nature.  That  want  is,  some  infallible  authority  revealing 
facts  that  shall  satisfj-  the  conscience,  regulate  the  affections, 
and  guide  the  reason.  Certainly  that  infallibility  cannot  lie 
in  the  reason;  for  it  is  liable  to  error,  and  subject  to  endless 
difterences  of  opinion.  If  infallibility  is  to  be  found  any- 
where, it  must  be  in  the  Bible ;  and  as  such  the  reason  must 
submit  to  revelation  or  sufter  the  consequences  of  its  rejec- 
tion. !N'ow,  the  reason,  by  presuming  to  pass  judgment  upon 
the  facts  of  the  Bible,  by  not  contenting  itself  with  the 
evidences,  but  assuming  to  admit  only  such  facts  as  suit  the 
mind,  leads  to  the  virtual  denial  of  any  higher  authority 
than  its  owni,  and  therefore  makes  itself  infallible  rather 
than  the  Scriptures.  Thus  skepticism  denies  to  man  his 
greatest  want,  that  which  he  needs  most  deeply,  and  substi- 
tutes for  heaven's  light  the  false  fire  that  but  dazzles  to  mis- 
lead. For  certainty  it  gives  doubt,  and  exchanges  the  bread 
of  eternal  life  for  a  scorpion  or  a  stone.  Man,  feeble,  erring, 
sinful,  and  unhappy,  is  flattered  with  a  profane  idea  of  his 


542  THE  DIFFICULTIES 

godlike  reason,  and  instructed  in  the  art  of  believing  in 
everything  else  rather  than  tTiose  immutable  truths  that  bear 
upon  their  face  the  impress  of  the  Deit3^  Thus  skepticism, 
having  deprived  the  reason  of  its  noblest  security  and  best 
friend,  sends  it,  a  homeless  fugitive,  to  wander  where  night 
never  ends  and  toil  is  forever  destitute  of  hope  or  joy. 

Consider,  also,  another  great  difRcultj^  of  skepticism.  On 
account  of  the  incomprehensibility  of  the  Bible,  or  the  mys- 
tery of  its  facts,  or  their  unpleasantness  to  the  feelings,  the 
reason  rejects  revelation  and  suffers  itself  to  be  led  alone  by 
its  own  standard.  But  when  it  comes  to  the  works  of  nature, 
when  it  considers  the  endless  variety  of  the  things  of  earth, 
it  encounters  that  which  is  equally  mysterious  or  incompre- 
hensible. Reason  does  not  escape  from  that  in  nature  which 
it  iiuds  in  the  word  of  God.  Here  are  obstacles  as  great  to 
be  surmounted,  facts  as  dark  to  be  explained,  and  wonders 
as  mysterious  as  meet  the  mind  in  revelation.  Why  does 
not  the  skeptic  take  the  same  liberty  with  the  facts  of  nature 
that  he  indulges  himself  with  when  he  comes  to  the  Bible  ? 
AVhy  does  not  he  use  the  same  argument  with  nature  as  with 
revelation  ?  If  the  incomprehensible  in  the  Bible  is  to  be  re- 
jected, why  not  that  in  nature?  If  the  skeptic  must  lower 
revelation  down  to  his  standard,  why  not  the  works  of  nature? 
There  are  other  mysterious  facts  than  those  found  in  the  Bible. 
The  skeptic  walks  in  a  world  of  mystery.  The  incompre- 
hensible surrounds  him  wherever  he  may  go,  and  does-  he 
think  any  objection  will  hold  good  against  revelation  that  is 
equally  valid  against  nature?  Can  he  believe  in  one,  and  for 
the  same  reason  disbelieve  the  other?  If  the  reason  of  the 
skeptic  will  not  reject  the  facts  of  nature  on  account  of  their 
mystery,  why  does  he  presume  upon  the  ground  of  the  in- 
comprehensible to  reject  the  facts  of  revelation  ? 

But  there  is  another  difficulty  that  encounters  the  skeptic. 
He  cannot  divorce  the  ethics  of  the  Bible  from  its  doctrines, 
or  its  morality  from  its  facts ;  they  stand  or  fall  together.  If 
he  receives  the  one,  he  must  receive  the  other ;  if  he  practices 
the  duties  of  the  Bible,  he  must  believe  its  facts ;  or  if  from 
the  heart  he  believes  the  facts,  he  must  practice  the  duties. 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  543 

The  reason  is  obvious.  The  duties  of  the  Bible  grow  out  of 
the  facts  and  are  founded  upon  them.  Repentance  rests  upon 
the  revealed  fact  of  an  atonement;  love  to  God,  upon  his 
personal  existence  and  attributes ;  faith,  upon  the  character 
of  Christ;  and  all  the  virtues  enjoined  in  the  Bible,  upon 
motives  that  spring  directly  from  the  belief  of  the  mind  in 
recorded  facts.  Thus  the  ethics  and  the  facts  of  the  Bible 
are  so  intimately  blended  that  the  reason  is  compelled  to 
submit  to  both,  if  it  is  willing  to  submit  to  either.  Another 
difficulty  of  skepticism  is,  that  it  removes  the  best  standard 
of  virtue  and  the  highest  incentive  to  moral  excellence, 
without  affording  any  equivalent.  What  better  standard  of 
virtue  than  the  precepts  of  the  Bible?  What  higher  au- 
thority than  the  word  of  God,  or  greater  motives  to  a  good 
life  than  the  sanctions  of  revelation  ?  What  is  the  authority 
of  skepticism  ? 

The  reply  is,  reason.  But  what  one  reason  declares  true 
another  reason  declares  false,  and  what  one  decides  to  be  vir- 
tuous another  contends  is  vicious.  Thus,  the  reason  that 
needs  itself  a  standard  to  go  by  is  compelled  to  invent  one 
without  revelation,  which  satisfies  neither  itself  nor  any 
other  reason,  l^or  is  the  reason  any  better  off  in  telling  us 
what  we  should  practice ;  having  disowned  the  Bible,  it  is 
driven  to  a  fabrication  of  a  code  of  morals  without  it.  But 
here  it  is  at  a  perfect  loss  what  to  do.  It  certainly  enjoins  no 
duties  so  good  or  so  numerous.  It  cannot  improve  upon  the 
morals  of  revelation,  nor  recommend  a  single  virtue  not  found 
in  the  word  of  God.  Thus  the  skeptic's  code  of  morals  is  as 
poor  as  Pharaoh's  lean  kine,  and  introduces  a  worse  famine  in 
morality  than  ever  visited  the  land  of  Egypt.  But  skepticism 
in  its  duties  has  no  sanctions.  The  duties  of  the  Bible  have 
the  authority  of  God  and  motives  that  embrace  three  worlds. 
Here  are  sanctions  that  come  with  impressive  weight  to  the 
mind  and  address  every  susceptibility  of  our  nature, — sanc- 
tions wide  as  the  universe,  and  binding  in  their  obligation 
upon  every  heart.  But  what  sanctions  has  the  skeptic's  code 
of  morals?  Discarding  the  facts  and  duties  of  the  Bible, 
where  is  the  obli station  to  conform  to  the  morals  of  the  infi- 


544  THE  DIFFICULTIES 

del?  Where,  with  no  revealed  will  of  God,  is  the  binding 
power  of  the  ethics  of  skepticism?  Thus,  when  we  ask  of 
the  skeptic  what  we  are  to  believe  and  what  we  are  to  do, 
we  find  that  our  belief  must  be  without  certainty,  and  our 
duty  without  obligation. 

Finall}',  skepticism  has  in  it  no  unity  of  belief,  no  harmony 
of  sentiment,  and  no  consistency  of  practice.  Of  the  three 
kinds  of  skepticism  that  are  comprehended  in  atheism,  pan- 
theism, and  deism,  where  is  the  unity  of  one  sj^stem  with 
itself,  or  the  harmony  of  all  three  united?  Among  the  end- 
less divisions  and  subdivisions  of  these  systems,  who  does  not 
know  that  skeptics  are  as  inconsistent  in  their  theories  as  in 
their  practice,  and  that,  having  rejected  the  infallibility  of  the 
Bible,  they  suffer  as  the  consequence  the  endless  fallibility 
of  themselves?  The  atheist  believes  in  no  God;  the  pan- 
theist confounds  God  with  his  works,  and  calls  nature  and 
law  God ;  while  the  deist  believes  in  a  personal  God  at  the 
same  time  that  he  denies  the  Bible  as  a  revelation  from 
God.  Thus  the  atheist  is  at  war  with  the  deist,  and  the 
pantheist  at  war  with  both,  and  while  all  agree  in  doing  away 
with  the  Bible,  they  show  the  consistency  of  the  brotherhood 
in  contending  with  each  other.  Every  new  school  of  skep- 
tics is  opposed  to  that  which  preceded  it,  and  no  sooner  does 
one  kind  of  unbelief  die  out  than  another  is  found  to  take 
its  place.  Thus  does  skepticism,  assuming  as  many  colors  as 
a  rainbow,  pass  away  to  return  again  when  there  turns  up 
anything  to  favor  its  pretensions. 

Reason,  that  submitting  to  revelation  would  become  enno- 
bled, and  grow  with  the  strength  of  an  angel,  and  be  the 
handmaid  of  virtue,  and  roam  over  heaven's  fields,  and  exer- 
cise itself  with  a  seraph's  thoughts,  and  have  the  joy  of  God 
and  the  peace  of  Christ,  by  the  rejection  of  the  Bible,  flutters 
like  a  Avounded  bird  in  the  air,  or  wanders  as  a  homeless 
Voyager  over  an  unknown  sea  of  doubt  and  delusion. 

Thus,  when  we  view  every  system  of  skepticism  that  dis- 
cards revelation,  we  find  that  the  skeptic,  by  attempting  to 
exalt  reason  above  its  sphere,  in  reality  degrades  it  within  its 
sphere.     The  skeptic,  possessing  no  unity  of  belief  or  con- 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  545 

sistency  of  practice,  can  promise  nothing  better  than  the  dis- 
quietude of  doubt  or  the  blind  submission  of  superstition. 
Having  no  agreement  in  himself,  and  no  harmony  with 
others,  the  skeptic  carries  an  element  in  his  heart  of  wretch- 
edness, that  will  but  increase  in  strength  with  every  perver- 
sion of  reason  and  abuse  of  conscience. 

If  no  other  objection  could  be  raised  against  skepticism 
than  its  want  of  all  unity  and  its  perpetual  disagreement,  that 
in  itself  should  be  enough  for  reason  to  renounce  it.  But 
when,' with  this,  its  danger,  its  fearful  difficulties,  and  its  in- 
utility are  taken  into  the  account^  how  much  nrore  powerful 
the  motive  for  a  cordial  rejection  ! 

Well  said  Eousseau  of  his  infidel  brethren,  "  I  have  con- 
sulted our  philosophers;  I  have  read  their  books;  I  have 
examined  their  opinions.  I  find  them  all  proud,  positive, 
and  dogmatic,  even  in  their  pretended  skepticism, — knowing 
everything  and  proving  nothing.  If  you  count  the  number 
of  them,  each  one  is  reduced  to  himself;  they  unite  but  to 

dispute." 

35 


CHAPTER    XXII. 

THE    UNREASONABLENESS    OF    SKEPTICISM. 

Man  possesses  a  physical,  an  intellectual,  and  a  moral  na- 
ture; but  it  is  man's  moral  nature  that  peculiarly  distinguishes 
him  from  the  brutes,  and  the  elevation  of  which  is  the  chief 
end  of  the  Bible.  Consequently,  our  physical  and  intellectual 
condition  holds  a  vastly  inferior  position  in  the  Bible  to  the 
moral  state  of  man.  It  is  this  which  the  Bible  seeks  chiefly 
to  benefit,  since  the  highest  ruin  of  sin  lies  in  man's  moral 
nature.  In  what  way,  then,  can  man,  as  a  moral  being,  be 
most  benefited  by  a  revelation  fi'om  God  ?  Is  it  by  a  revela- 
tion exclusively  for  the  intellect,  to  gratify  chiefly  the  curiosity 
of  the  mind,  or  by  a  revelation  that  shall  more  intimately 
adapt  itself  to  the  wants  of  our  moral  nature  ?  Evidently, 
the  latter.  The  Bible  has  a  far  higher  end  than  simply  to 
gratify  human  curiosity.  It  exalts  virtue  above  mind  and 
duty  above  knowledge.  The  chief  excellence  of  the  Scrip- 
ture consists  in  its  adaptation  to  man's  moral  nature.  It 
seeks,  first  of  all,  to  elevate  man  in  the  noblest  part  of  his 
being,  to  make  him  a  partaker  of  the  purity  of  heaven  and 
an  associate  with  holy  angels.  Such  being  the  great  end 
of  revelation,  let  the  skeptic  tell  us  what  better  end  the 
Bible  could  reveal,  or  what  nobler  method  it  could  devise  of 
securing  its  end,  than  it  has  done.  If  the  skeptic  can  im- 
prove upon  the  Bible,  let  him  tell  us  how  he  can  thus  do. 
Would  he  consult  more  the  interests  of  man's  physical  and 
intellectual  nature  ?  would  he  gratify  more  the  curiosity  of 
man  in  respect  to  the  mode  or  the  reasons  of  the  great  facts 
of  revelation  ?  But  could  this  be  done  unless  at  the  expense 
of  our  moral  nature  ?  Could  any  wiser  course  be  taken  than 
has  been  done,  in  respect  to  the  bettering  of  man's  moral 
state  ?  What  better  rule  of  obligation,  or  more  impressive 
(546) 


THE    UNREASONABLENESS   OF  SKEPTICISM.      547 

sanctions  to  enforce  it,  could  the  skeptic  devise,  if  to  him  it 
wfis  left  to  invent  a  code  of  morals  or.  a  law  of  dnt}'?  The 
skeptic  must  admit  that  man's  moral  nature  is  superior  to  his 
intellectual,  and. that  if  a  revelation  is  given  to  benefit  man 
it  must  be  chiefly  directed  to  bettering  his  moral  state  or 
making  him  more  virtuous  and  good.  Such  being  the  case, 
the  intellect  must  hold  an  inferior  position  to  the  heart,  and 
to  cultivate  virtue  rather  than  mind  should  be  the  great  end 
of  a  revelation  from  God  to  sinners;  and  thus  we  find  it. 
But  the  very  thing  which  is  the  chief  recommendation  of  the 
Bible  is  that  which  the  skeptic  most  stumbles  at.  The  skeptic 
treats  with  contempt  the  Bible  because  such  a  fact  is  difficult 
to  comprehend,  or  such  a  doctrine  is  hard  to  understand,  or 
the  reasons  for  such  a  statement  of  truth  are  not  given.  In 
one  place  the  Bible  is  too  puerile;  in  another,  too  abstruse. 
Here  its  repetition  is  objected  to,  and  there  its  conciseness. 
In  one  part  its  simplicity  is  found  fault  witli ;  in  another,  its 
obscurity.  The  skeptic  complains  that  his  intellect  is  not 
fully  satisfied  by  the  Bible  ;  that  he  cannot  understand  all 
the  doctrines  or  comprehend  many  of  the  facts  of  revelation. 
Suppose  this  may  all  be  true  with  the  skeptic,  what  does  it 
amount  to  ?  Is  the  Bible  onl}-  given  for  the  intellect?  Is  it 
to  gratify  simply  the  curiosity  of  man  that  God  reveals  his 
word  ?  Is  the  superior  part  of  man  to  be  neglected  in  order 
to  gratify  the  mind?  Is  the  intelligence  to  be  worshiped  at 
the  expense  of  virtue  ?  Is  knowledge  to  be  preferred  to 
duty  ? 

It  is  the  glory  of  the  Bible  that  while  it  satisfies  all  the 
just  demands  of  the  mind,  it  yet  does  not  sacrifice  the  moral 
nature  to  the  intellectual.  The  skeptic  makes  this  his^hest 
excellence  of  the  Bible  the  reason  for  its  rejection.  He 
comes  to  it  alone  as  a  book  addressed  to  the  mind;  he  reads 
it  as  he  would  read  a  work  upon  science  and  mathematics, 
or  a  treatise  upon  philosophy  or  history.  It  does  not  enter 
his  mind  that,  superior  as  may  be  its  intellectual  merit,  its 
chief  excellence  consists  in  the  fact  that  it  consults  infinitely 
more  the  moral  state  of  man  than  his  mental  condition  ;  that 
to  renew  the  heart  and  life  is  vavstly  more  its  object  than  to 


548  THE    UNREASONABLENESS 

impart  knowledge.  Such  being  the  end  of  revelation,  how 
unreasonable  are  the.  objections  of  the  skeptic!  This  is 
more  evident  when  we  consider  that  the  real  difficulty  lies 
not  in  the  mind  of  the  skeptic,  but  in  his  heart.  The  Bible 
reveals  enough  for  all  practical  purposes,  and  is  clear  enough 
for  all  duty. 

There  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  that  the  reason  can  suitably 
object  to,  and  nothing  that  is  unfriendly  to  the  highest  exer- 
cise of  the  mind.  It  forbids  no  investigation,  nor  disapproves 
of  any  proper  exercise  of  the  intellect.  Why,  then,  does  the 
skeptic  object  to  the  Bible  ?  He  cannot  devise  any  better 
remedy  for  sin,  any  nobler  inducements  to  virtue,  any  higher 
rewards  for  goodness ;  he  cannot  show  a  safer  road  to  heaven, 
or  a  clearer  path  to  happiness  ;  he  cannot  say  that  w^e  ought 
not  to  love  God  with  our  whole  heart,  or  that  we  should  not 
obey  his  law,  or  believe  upon  Christ  his  Son,  or  repent  of 
sin,  or  perform  every  duty  that  conscience  responds  to  in 
revelation.  Why,  then,  does  the  skeptic  continue  objecting 
to  the  Bible  ?  Does  the  reason  lie  so  much  in  the  mind  as 
in  the  heart?  In  all  moral  duties  what  we  dislike  we  uni- 
formly misrepresent;  and  this  is  precisely  the  condition  of 
the  skeptic.  He  misrepresents  the  i^xcts  of  the  Bible  because 
he  dislikes  the  duties  of  the  Bible;  he  makes  a  stumbling- 
block  of  his  intellect  because  his  heart  is  wrong.  Can  any- 
thing be  more  unreasonable  ?  The  Bible  presents  itself  em- 
bodying every  duty  needful  for  practice,  and  every  fact 
essential  for  belief.  It  demands  a  reception  from  motives 
addressed  to  our  highest  interests  for  two  worlds ;  it  comes 
to  secure  for  us  our  noblest  welfare  in  all  that  relates  to  body 
and  soul.  Its  great  end  is  to  make  us  wnser,  better,  and 
happier,  to  impart  a  salvation  such  as  God  alone  can  give  and 
alone  can  full}'  comprehend. 

Under  such  circumstances,  does  not  the  difficulty  of  the 
skeptic  rest  rather  upon  a  w'rong  state  of  heart  than  of  mind? 
So  long  as  his  objections  lead  him  to  the  rejection  of  the 
Bible,  can  he  practice  its  duties  ?  Can  he  obey  the  precepts  of 
the  Bible  while  he  disbelieves  its  doctrines  ?  Can  he  be  a 
'over  of  its  morality  while  he  is  uninfluenced  by  its  sanctions? 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  549 

If  he  coDsiders  the  Bible  unworthy  the  belief  of  the  mind, 
is  it  strange  that  he  should  deny  it  the  love  of  the  heart  ? 

The  unreasonableness  of  the  skeptic  is  also  seen  in  that  he 
cannot  prove  false  the  great  fiicts  of  the  Bible,  even  were 
they  not  made  known  in  the  Bible.  Those  facts  may  be 
divided  into  two  classes:  truths  to  be  believed  in,  and  duties 
to  practice.  Let  us  look  at  the  first  class  of  facts.  Consider 
the  two  states  of  future  happiness  and  future  misery.  Can 
the  skeptic  prove  these  facts  untrue,  even  if  not  revealed  in 
the  Bible?  Can  reason  show  them  impossible,  even  if  not  a 
word  had  been  written  in  respect  to  those  two  states  of  exist- 
ence? The  Bible  did  not  invent  these  separate  states  of 
being.  The  Bible  records  them  as  facts,  but  it  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  making  of  them.  Their  existence  would  have 
been  equally  as  true  had  no  information  been  imparted  in 
respect  to  their  reality.  The  Bible  acts  the  part  of  a  chart 
that  reveals  to  the  mariner  the  port  of  safety  and  the  rocks 
that  endanger  the  vessel;  but  is  that  to  be  considered  a  defect 
which  with  one  hand  points  out  our  ruin,  and  the  other  our 
security  ? 

Consider  also  the  character  of  God,  who  is  revealed  as  our 
moral  Governor,  a  Being  of  infinite  perfection,  immutable 
in  his  purposes,  alike  omnipresent  in  his  existence  and  om- 
niscient in  his  knowledge.  But  the  character  of  God  was 
the  same  before  the  Bible  was  written  as  since.  His  moral 
government  possessed,  millions  of  ages  ago,  the  same  ele- 
ments of  durability,  of  certainty,  of  wisdom,  of  goodness, 
and  of  strength,  that  they  now  have. 

If,  again,  we  consider  the  facts  in  respect  to  the  threefold 
existence  of  God,  the  divine  atonement  of  Christ,  and  the 
operations  of  the  Eternal  Spirit,  we  arrive  at  the  same  con- 
clusion. The  Bible  makes  known  truths  that  would  be 
equally  realities  even  if  not  recorded  upon  the  inspired 
page.  Consider  also  the  second  class  of  truths  that  com- 
prehend the  duties  of  the  Bible.  The  truths  that  are  com- 
prised in  the  great  law  of  moral  obligation,  which  the  reason 
and  conscience  declare  as  right  and  suitable  for  man,  which 
speak  of  human  liberty  and  human  responsibilit}-,  which  re- 


550  THE    UNREASONABLENESS 

gard  man  as  a  moral  and  accountable  being,  wliicb  point  to 
reward  and  punishment  for  human  conduct,  would  not  be 
less  true  even  if  there  was  no  revelation  from  God.  Our 
liberty  and  our  responsibility  commenced  with  our  moral 
agenc}'.  The  great  law  of  obligation  that  binds  us  to  the 
service  of  God,  that  imposes  upon  us  duties  to  our  Creator 
and  to  man,  that  treats  us  as  endowed  with  conscience  to 
discriminate  right  from  wrong,  and  with  liberty  to  act  as  free 
agents,  did  not  owe  its  origin  to  the  Bible.  This  is  a  fact 
that  revelation  makes  clearer,  but  can  never  create.  It  is 
as  indestructible  as  our  own  existence,  as  permanent  as  our 
moral  nature,  and  as  certain  as  God  himself. 

In  our  iniidelity  we  may  cheat  ourselves  into  the  belief  that 
man  is  compelled  by  necessity  as  absolute  as  that  of  a  machine 
to  act  always  as  he  does  act, — or  we  may,  with  the  pantheist, 
confound  God  with  nature  and  make  man  a  part  of  God,  a 
strict  emanation  of  his  essential  being,  and  thus  by  a  different 
road  arrive  at  the  same  negation  of  moral  obligation  as  the 
advocate  of  necessity, — or,  with  the  mystic,  we  may  contend 
that  we  are  only  the  passive  recipients  of  influences  which  we 
can  neither  avert  nor  control, — or,  with  the  skeptic,  we  may 
den}^  the  certainty  of  all  knowledge  and  attempt  to  destroy 
the  foundation  of  all  human  belief,  and  thus  equally  with  the 
advocate  of  necessity,  the  pantheist,  and  the  mystic,  aim  to 
make  false  or  useless  the  law  of  obligation,  and  seek  to  absolve 
man  from  his  highest  duty, — and  yet  the  law  of  obligation 
would  still  remain,  the  eternal  principle  of  right  and  wrong 
would  be  unaffected.  God's  government  would  be  as  immu- 
table as  before,  and  conscience,  true  to  its  high  origin,  would 
give  its  verdict  in  favor  of  divine  justice  and  the  rightful 
claim  of  God  upon  the  obedience  of  the  heart.  Thus,  let  the 
mind  cover  itself  with  sophistry, — let  the  reason  try  ever  so 
hard  to  prove  false  to  itself, — let  the  heart,  impatient  of  good 
restraint,  treat  the  Bible  as  a  fable,  and  obey  no  other  voice 
than  that  of  passion  or  of  selfishness, — and  yet,  amid  the 
ever-changing'  forms  of  error,  or  tossed  ever  so  madly  upon 
the  sea  of  delusion,  there  still  would  rest  upon  the  soul  the 
same  undeviating  law  of  duty,  and  the  same  eternal  account- 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  561 

ability  to  God.  Thus,  Bible  or  no  Bible,  human  responsi- 
bility with  human  liberty  would  go  together,  and  duty  and 
virtue  would  ever  remain  to  bind  man  to  his  Maker  and 
his  fellow-man.  How  unreasonable,  then,  to  find  fault  with 
the  facts  of  revelation,  which  only  reveal  more  clearly  the 
truths  of  nature  ! 

The  unreasonableness  of  skepticism  is  also  seen  in  that 
the  most  it  can  pretend  to  is  that  it  is  a  system  of  doubt,  and 
not  of  evidence.  The  skeptic  doubts  the  facts  of  the  Bible, — 
he  doubts  its  truth,  its  divine  origin,  its  harmony,  its  excel- 
lence and  proffered  remedy  for  sin  ;  but  he  cannot  give  good 
reasons  for  his  doubts, — he  cannot  offer  any  proof  to  convince 
the  mind  of  the  validity  of  his  doubts, — he  cannot  show  evi- 
dence that  he  is  right  and  that  all  who  believe  the  Bible  are 
wrono-.  The  most  he  can  do  is  to  work  his  own  mind  into 
error  or  plunge  deeper  into  self-delusion  ;  he  may  consider 
himself  as  an  irresponsible  being,  or  his  soul  as  mortal  as  his 
body,  or  his  only  dut}'  to  live  in  obedience  to  passion  or 
selfishness, — he  may  consider  as  visionary  God's  law,  and 
unreal  the  claims  of  his  moral  government, — he  may  look 
upon  Christianity  as  an  imposture,  and  the  atonement  of 
Christ  as  a  delusion, — he  may  imagine  himself  absolved  from 
every  duty  of  Christianity, — he  may  doubt  the  existence  even 
of  God,  or  confound  his  personality  with  nature, — he  may 
acknowledge  no  higher  law  than  his  own  pleasure,  and  deride 
any  idea  of  a  judgment  to  come, — and  yet  his  doubts  are 
doubts  without  proof, — doubts  that  conscience  disowns,  and 
which  reason,  if  true  to  itself,  declares  baseless, — doubts  that 
can  bear  no  investigation,  and  which  vanish  as  darkness  before 
the  sunlight  of  truth.  If  the  skeptic  could  only  offer  some- 
thing better  than  doubt, — if  his  objections  could  be  proved  or 
his  infidelity  shown  reasonable, — the  case  would  be  different. 
It  would  be  another  thing  if  he  could  give  some  substitute 
for  what  he  rejects,  or  make  peaceful  that  heart  whose  faith 
he  has  destroyed  ;  but  when  for  confidence  he  gives  distrust, 
and  for  hope  despair, — when  he  destroys  the  noblest  security 
of  man,  and  brings  midnight  over  his  brightest  prospects, — it 
is  then  that  skepticism  is  seen  to  be  no  less  deplorable  in  its 
delusion  than  miserable  in  its  end. 


552  THE    UNBEASONABLENESS 

The  unreasonableness  of  the  skeptic  is  seen  in  the  war  he 
institutes  with  his  conscience  and  moral  nature.  There  is 
that  in  man  that  calls  loudly  for  a  religious  faith.  There 
is  a  perceived  want  in  our  nature  that  must  have  something 
to  satisfy  it.  Man  restlessly  turns  awa}-  from  a  chaos  of 
doubt.  Doubt  itself  is  a  ceaseless  source  of  trouble;  it  is 
foreign  to  all  peace  of  mind  and  all  true  happiness.  The 
doubter  feels  himself  miserable ;  he  finds  in  his  own  heart 
an  unending  source  of  disquietude.  To  be  ever  doubting 
and  never  coming  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  the  very 
life  "of  skepticism.  As  such,  it  must  be  at  war  with  con- 
science and  the  moral  nature.  Both  demand  some  foundation 
to  rest  upon.  They  are  not  content  to  be  at  the  mercy  of 
every  idle  wind  of  error  or  the  sport  of  every  shifting  cur- 
rent. With  human  liberty  there  awakens  in  the  mind  a 
sense  of  accountability  ever  coextensive  with  the  perception 
of  freedom.  Conscience  speaks  of  right  and  wrong,  of  duty 
to  God  and  man.  No  sophistry  can  stifle  the  war  we  wage 
with  our  highest  welfare  for  two  worlds. 

As  right  belief  is  intimately  associated  with  right  practice, 
so  we  must  believe  the  Bible,  or  we  cannot  practice  its  duties. 
We  must  have  faith  in  its  doctrines,  or  we  never  will  obey  its 
precepts.  The  skeptic  who  gives  himself  up  to  doubt  must, 
if  the  Bible  is  true,  be  at  war  with  himself;  he  enters  into  a 
controversy  with  his  own  nature,  where  his  endless  doubts 
allow  him  neither  stability  nor  safety. 

If  the  skeptic  realizes  his  situation,  he  must  be  unhappy ; 
his  nature  demands  some  foundation  for  his  doubts,  and  he 
cannot  show  it;  his  reason  demands  some  evidence  of  his 
unbelief,  and  he  is  unable  to  give  it ;  his  conscience  impor- 
tunes him  to  obey  the  truth,  and  he  refuses  to  listen  to  its 
voice.  Thus  does  the  skeptic  raise  in  his  own  heart  a  strife 
that  must  last  as  long  as  his  doubts  ;  he  carries  about  in  his 
own  heart  a  judge  that  will,  whenever  interrogated,  decide 
against  him.  The  evil  of  the  skeptic  is  not  that  he  doubts 
because  sufficient  evidence  is  not  given  for  the  facts  of  the 
Bible,  but  because  all  evidence  is  not  given  ;  his  unbelief 
rests  not  upon  reason,  but  upon  the  want  of  it. 


OF  SKEPTICISM.  553 

Does  the  skeptic  consider  liow  finite  must  be  his  mind, 
how  limited  the  range  of  his  observation  ?  Does  he  consider 
that  every  day  he  believes  in  what  passes  about  him,  upon 
the  slightest  evidence,  while  he  rejects  the  Bible  upon  the 
greatest  ?  Does  he  think  upon  the  limitation  of  his  knowl- 
edge and  the  infinitude  of  that  universe  that  opens  up  to  his 
inspection  ?  Is  the  skeptic  aware  how  wide  the  space  that 
exists  between  him  and  God,  how  measureless  the  distance 
between  the  creature  and  the  Creator  ?  Does  he  feel,  as  he 
should  feel,  what  interests  he  endangers  by  the  rejection  of 
the  Bible  ?  Can  he  realize  the  magnitude  of  his  loss  with 
no  faith  ?  Living,  as  he  does,  an  unbeliver,  does  he  think 
where  unbelief  will  land  him  ?  When  he  thinks  of  death 
and  what  lies  beyond,  is  it  a  matter  of  indiiference  how  poor 
may  be  the  hopes  and  how  uncertain  the  foundation  where 
rest  the  feet  ? 

Does  the  skeptic  imagine  his  doubts  can  benefit  him  when 
reason  is  shipwrecked  and  conscience  abused  ?  Is  he  confi- 
dent of  safety  while  neglecting  his  Bible  and  throwing  con- 
tempt upon  all  its  provisions  of  mercy?  Does  the  skeptic 
think  his  unbelief  will  not  injure  him,  while  it  is  at  war  with 
reason  and  conscience  and  can  live  only  by  the  rejection  of 
the  Bible?  If  he  feels  himself  accountable,  should  he  not 
fear  for  duty  neglected,  truth  not  believed  in,  God  disre- 
garded, Christ  unsubmitted  to,  heaven  uncared  for,  an  im- 
mortality of  glory  unsought,  and  the  soul  wandering  reckless 
over  a  sea  of  doubt  and  never  coming  to  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth  ? 


INDEX  TO  AUTHORS. 


(555) 


INDEX  TO   AUTHORS. 


The  Theological  Index,  or  References  to  Works  in  all  Depart- 
ments of  Religious  Literature,  by  Howard  Malcom,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  is 
a  most  thorough  and  exhaustiv^e  work,  and  will  be  found  indis- 
pensable to  those  who  may  wish  to  enter  into  an  extended  investiga- 
tion of  any  of  the  subjects  that  come  under  the  head  of  natural  or 
revealed  theology. 

The  present  index  is  exclusively  taken  from  that  of  Dr.  Malcom, 
and  is  designed  to  assist  those  who  may  not  be  in  possession  of  his 
valuable  work.  Only  a  small  proportion  of  the  authors  who  have 
written  upgn  the  different  subjects  suggested  under  natural  and 
revealed  theology  are  here  referred  to ;  but  my  object  has  been,  as 
far  as  possible,  to  secure  such  a  list  as  may  be  most  desired  by  the 
general  reader  and  best  adapted  for  the  object  aimed  at  in  the 
preparation  of  my  book. 


NATURAL   THEOLOGY. 


EFFICIENT   CAUSATION    AND   FINAL   CAUSATION. 


American  Biblical  Eepository.  2d 
Series.  2  :  381.  3  :  174.    4  :  217,  467. 

Boyle's  (Hon.  Rob.)  Works. 

Brown's  Philosophy  of  the  Mind. 

Buchanan's  Modern  Atheism. 

Fraser's  Magazine.  16  :  254.  (Final 
Causes.) 

Hume's  (David)  Essays. 

Irons's  Doct.  of  Final  Causes.  (Admi- 


Mill's  Exam,  of  Sir  W.  Hamilton's 
Philos. 

Philosophy  of  Necessity. 

Miller's  Old  Red  Sandstone.  (Final 
Causes.) 

Miiller's  Christian  Doct.  of  Sin. 

Scott's  Limits  of  Metaphysical  Sci- 
ence. 

Travis  (Henry)  on  Moral  Freedom. 


rable.)  ]  Whish  on  the  First  Cause. 

'  Woods  (Dr.)  on  Cause  and  Effect. 

GENERAL  LAWS  OF  THE  EARTH  AND  THE  SUN. 

Bridgewater  Treatises.  i  Buchanan's  (James)  Lectures. 

Cobb's  Bampton  Lectures.   1783.  I  Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lectures.  1839. 

(557) 


558 


INDEX   TO  AUTHORS. 


DEVELOPMENT   THEORY. 


Brongniart,  Tableau   des   Genres   de 

Vegetaux,  Fossiles,  etc. 
Lamarck,   Hist,    des   Animaux    sans 

Vertebres. 
Maillet,  Philosophie. 
Atkinson's  (H.  G.)  Letters. 
Darwin's  Zoonomia. 
Huxley's  (Prof.  T.  H.)  Works. 
Spencer's  (Herbert)  Illustrations   of 

Universal  Progress. 


Agassiz's  Study  of  Natural  History. 

Brodie's  (Sir  Benj.)  Lectures. 

Christian  Examiner.  NewSeries.  1:60. 

Lubbock's  Lectures  on  the  Origin  of 
Man. 

Lyell's  Antiquity  of  Man. 

Stillingfleet's  Originos  Sacrae. 

Walker's  (Jas.  B.)  Sacred  Philoso- 
phy- 


LIFE   AND    INSTINCT. 


Bingley's  Animal  Biography. 

Brougham's  (Lord)  Dissertations. 

Brown's  Biog.  Sketches  of  Quadru- 
peds. 

Buffon's  Natural  History. 

Bushnan's  Philosophy  of  Instinct. 

Couch's  Illustrations  of  Instinct. 

French's  True  Nature  of  Instinct. 

Good's  (J.  M.)  Bo^k  of  Nature. 

Hancock's  Phys.  and  Moral  Kelations 
of  Instinct. 

Jarrold  on  Instinct  and  Keason. 

Kemp  (T.  L  )  on  Instinct. 

Kirby's  Bridgewater  Treatise  (the 
Ttli). 

THE    HUMAN    BODY  AND    MIND,  AND    THE    TESTIMONY  OF    HISTORY  AND 
SCIENCE    UPON   THE    ORIGIN    OF    MAN. 


Law  (T.)  on  Instinctive  Impulses. 

Second  Thoughts  on  do. 

Morris's  Kecords  of  Animal  Saga- 
city. 

Mower  on  the  Nature  of  Instinct. 

Paine's  (Dr.)  Soul  Distinct  from  Mat- 
ter. 

Paley's  Natural  Theology. 

Kamsay  (Sir  Geo..)  on  Instinct  and 
Eeason. 

Swainson's  Habits  of  Animals. 

Wakefield's  Instinct  Displayed. 

Ware's  Philosophy  of  Natural  His- 
tory. 


Du  Moulin,  Hist  des  Eaces  humaines. 
Edward, Des  Caracteres  physiologiques 

des  Kaces  humaines. 
Lacepfede,     Histoire      naturelle      de 

I'Homme 

Les  Ages  de  la  Nature. 

Pauw,  Qiluvres  philosophiques. 
Virey,  Hist,  naturelle  du  Genre  hu- 

maine. 
Ainer.  Biblical  Kepos.  2d  Series.   11: 

274. 
Brit.  Quarterly  Rev.   1 :  337. 
Democratic  Eev.  26:227.  27:41,  133. 
Dunbar's     History    of    Mankind    in 

Eude  and  in  Cultivated  Ages. 
Eraser's  Magazine.   30  :  537  ^44  :  6.51. 
Guyot's  Earth  and  Man.    Tr.  by  Eel- 
ton. 
Home's  (Lord  Kames)  Sketches. 
Jones's  Origin  of  Differences  of  Color, 

etc. 
Latham's  Nat.  Hist,  of  the  Varieties 

of  Man. 
— —  Man  and  his  Migrations. 
Lawrence's  Lectures.   (Able.) 
Littell's  Living  Age  24  :  490.  29  :  823. 
Lond.  Quart   Eev.  1:328    86:1. 


Methodist  Quart.  Eev.  4 :  2-55  10  :  531. 

Mudie's  (Eobt.)  Works.  Vol.  3. 

Murray's  (Jas.)  Creation,  and  the  De- 
sign of  the  Mosaic  History. 

Princeton  Eeview.  21:159.  22:608, 
313. 

Prichard's  Physical  History  of  Man- 
kind (Modifying  Inf.  of  Physical 
and  Moral  Causes,  etc.  1836.  Greatly 
improved  in  1855    162  engravings.) 

Schoolcraft's  Notes  on  the  Iroquois. 

Smith's  (Sam.  S.)  Causes  of  Difference 
in  Color. 

Smith's  (C.  H.)  Nat.  Hist,  of  the  Spe- 
cies. (With  an  introduction,  con- 
taining the  views  of  Blumenbach, 
Prichard,  Buchman,  Agassiz,  etc.) 

Van  Amrige's  Natural  History  of 
Man.  (Eeviews  Lawrence,  Prich- 
ard, and  others.) 

Ward's  (S  H.)  Nat.  History  of  Man. 
(Plates.) 

Westminster  Eeview.  14:  17.  20: 186. 
55 :  83. 

Young  (J  E.)  on  Modern  Skepticism. 
1865.  (Eeviews  Lyell,  Huxley,  Co- 
lenso,  etc.) 


INDEX   TO   AUTHOBS. 


559 


CHANCE   AND     FATE. 


Buchanan's  Modern  Atheism.  Chap. 6. 
Bcntley's  Boyle  Lectures.   1693. 
Clarke   (Dr.  Sam.)  on  the  Laws   of 

Chance. 
Hoyle's   Essay  on    the    Doctrine   of 

Chances. 
Howe's  (Charles)  Meditations. 
"Watt's  Ontology. 
Arpe,  Theatro  Fati. 


Buchanan's  Modern  Atheism. 

Comte's  Positive  Philosophy. 

Positive  Politics. 

Positive  Catechism. 

Cudworth's  Intellectual  System.  Ch.l. 

Toplady   on   the  "Fate"  of  the  An- 
cients. 
See  a  great  list  of  foreign  writers  in 

Arpe,  above  named. 


NATURAL   THEOLOGY. 


Bullet,  Exist,  de  Dieu  demontree. 

Curcellii  Opera.  Lib.  I.  cap.  2. 

Delalle,  Theologie  naturelle. 

Doederleini  Theologia. 

Gerhardi  Loci  Theologici. 

Lesser,  Theologie  des  Insectes. 

Nahmmacher  de  Nat.  Theol.Ciceronis. 

Sabunde,  Theologia  Naturalis. 

Vitringffi  Opuscula. 

"Wild's  Vernunftglaube. 

Abbadie  on  the  Christian  Keligion. 

Abernethy's  (John)  Sermons. 

Allen's  Oracles  of  Reason. 

Anderson's  Course  of  Creation. 

Atkey's  Being  and  Attributes  of  God. 

Barker's  Natural  Theology. 

Barrow's  (Bp.)  "Works. 

Beavan's  Elements  of  Natural  The- 
ology. 

Bellamy's  (Joseph)  Sermons. 

Bentley's  Boyle  Lectures.  1692. 

Biblioth.  Sacra.  8  :  241. 

Berkeley's  Minute  Philosopher. 

Boyle  on  Final  Causes. 

Bridgewater  Treatises,  viz.: 
Bell's  3Iechanism  of  the  Hand. 
Buckland's  Geology  with  Eeference 
to  Theology.      (This  author  ex- 
pended on  the  90  plates  the  whole 
of  the  thousand  pounds  received 
from  the  Bridgewater  fund.) 
Chalmers  on  the  Power,   "Wisdom, 
and  Goodness  of  God,  as  seen  in 
the  Adaptation  of  External  Na- 
ture to  the  Moral  and  Intellectual 
Constitution  of  Man. 
Kidd  on  the  Adaptation  of  Nature 
to  the  Phj'sical  Condition  of  Man. 
Kirby's  "Wisdom  of  God,  as  seen  in 
the  History,  Habits,  and  Instincts 
of  Animals. 
Prout's  Chemistry,  Meteorol.,  and 

Digestion. 
Roget's     Animal     and     Vegetable 
Phvsiologv. 


"Whewell's  Astronomy  and  General 
Physics. 

Brit.  Quar.  Review.   7:204. 

Brougham's  Natural  Theology. 

Brown's  Existence  of  a  Supreme  Cre- 
ator. 

Burnett's  (C.  M.)  Power,  etc.,  as  seen 
in  the  Animal  Creation.    (Capital.) 

Bushnan's  Study  of  Nature. 

Butler's  Analogy  of  Religion  and  Na- 
ture. 

Charnock's  "Works. 

Christ.  Exam.  30:273.6:389.  13:187. 

Christian  Quar.  Spect.  8:177.  10:819. 

Christian  Review.     3  :  1. 

Crabbe's  (Geo.)  System  of  Natural 
Theology. 

Crombie's  Natural  Theology. 

Dick's  Christian  Philosopher. 

Dryden  (J.)  on  Natural  Religion. 

Durham's  Boyle  Lectures.   1711,  1712. 

Astro-Theology. 

Dublin  Univ.  Mag.   6  :  448.   7  :  597. 

Eclectic  Rev.  4th  series.     5  :  609. 

Edinb.  Rev.   1:287.  64:141. 

Fergus's  Testimony  of  Nature. 

Eraser's  Mag.   12  :  375.  13  :  694. 

Gisbourne's  Test,  of  Nat.  Theol.  to 
Religion. 

Gosse's  Life  in  its  Manifestations. 

Gretton's  Review  of  the  Argument 
a  priori  for  the  Being  of  God. 

Grew's  (N.)  Cosmologia  Sacra. 

Grinfield's  Conn,  of  Nat.  and  Rev. 
Theology. 

Grove's  (N.)  "Wisdom  of  Deity. 

Hall's  (Robt.)  Modern  Infidelity. 

Hamilton  on  the  Supreme  Being. 

Hampden's  Philos.  Evid.  of  Christi- 
anity. 

Harris's  (Robert)  Sermons. 

Hey 's  (John)  Lectures.  Bk.l,ch.3&4. 

Jones's  Natural  Evidences  of  Christi- 
anity. 

Laws's  (E.)  Theory  of  Religion. 


560 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


Leibnitz's  Theodice. 
Leighton's  (Abp.)  Lectures.'*' 
Lesser 's  Insecto-Theology. 
Leiiwenhoeck-'s  "Works.     Trans,  by  S. 

Hoole. 
Littell's  Living  Age.     19  :  289. 
Lowman's  Unity  and  Perfections  of 

God. 
McCosli's  Typical  Forms  and  Special 

Ends  in  Creation. 

On  Intuitions. 

Divine  Gov.,Pliysical  and  Moral. 

McCulloclc's  Proofs  and  Illustrations, 

etc. 
Miller's  (Hugh)  Works. 
Milne  on  the  State  of  the  Old  World. 
Month.  Eev.  88:82.   120:30. 
"New  Eng.  Mag.  4 :  454. 
New  York  Kev.  1 :  137,  298. 
Nieuwentyt's  Eeligious  Philosopher. 
North  Am.  Kev.     42  :  467.     54  :  102, 

256. 
OUvife  on  the  Origin  and  Government 

of  the  World. 


Paley's  Natural  Theology. 

Ragg's  Creation's  Testimony  to  its 
God. 

Ray's  Physico-Theology. 

Read's  (H.)  Palace  of  the  Great  King. 

Rust's  (Bp.)  Use  of  Reason. 

Seaton's  Grounds  of  Religion. 

Spalding  (J.  J.)  on  Religion. 

Stebbing's  Defence  of  Dr.  Clark. 

Steere's  (Edw.)  Exist,  and  Attributes 
of  God. 

Sykes's  Foundation  of  Religion. 

Thompson's  Christian  Theism. 

Towne's  Actonian.     (A  prize  essay.) 

TuUock's  Theism.     (A  prize  essay.) 

Tunstall's  (James)  Academica. 

Turretin's  (Francis)  Dissertations. 
Diss.  1. 

Turton's  Natural  Theology,  consid- 
ered with  reference  to  Lord  Brou- 
gham's discourse. 

Westminster  Review.   17  :413. 

Wilson's  (Professor)  Chemical  Final 
Causes. 


THE    PROBLEM    OF    PHYSICAL   AND   MORAL   EVIL. 


Beausobre,  Hist,  de  Manichaeisme.   L 

V.  c.  1. 
Bilfinger   de   Origine   Mali  praecipue 

moralis. 
Buddei    Miscellan.    Sacrorum.     Pars 

III. 
Calvin  de  Peccato  originale. 
Cheneviere,  du  Peche  originel. 
Disputatio    de    Orig.    Peccato    inter 

Flacium  et  Strigel.     1560. 
Haberkornii  (Pet.)  Dissertationes. 
Junii  (Francisc.)  Dissertationes. 
Leibnitz,  Essais  de  Theodicse. 
Martinus  de  Causa  Peccati. 
Matth^eus  de  Origine  Mali. 
Scharfii  Disputationes  Apologeticse. 
Strang! us  de  Voluntate  Dei. 
Thumii  (Theod.)  Dissertationes. 
Tilene,  de  la  Cause  et  de  I'Origine  du 

Peche. 
Am.   Bibl.  Repos.   2d  series    8  :  314. 

10:353. 
Am.  Quart.  Register.     15:  113. 
Balguy  on  Divine  Rectitude. 
Bayles's  Origin  of  Evil. 
Bays  on  Divine  Benevolence. 
Bellamy's  (Joseph)  Sermons. 
Bennet  on  the  Cause  of  Evil. 
Biblioth.  Sac.  7:254,  479. 
Broughani's  (Lord)  Dissertations  on 

Natural  Theology.     Diss.  3. 
Butter  worth  on  Moral  Government. 
Casaubon's  Origin  of  Temporal  Evil. 


Chalmers's  Natural  Theology.  (On  the 
theory  of  Leibnitz.) 

Christian  Disciple.   1 :  300. 

Christian  Exam    33  :  169. 

Christian  Rev.  7  :  520.     8  :  7. 

Christmas's  Sin;  its  Causes  and  Con- 
sequences. 

Cud  worth's  Intellectual  System  of  the 
Universe. 

Clarke's  (John)  Boyle  Lectures. 
1719,  1720. 

D'Oyley's  (George)  Dissertations. 
Diss.  1. 

Duncan's  (John)  Philos.  of  Human 
Nature. 

Edwards  (Pres.)  on  the  Will.  Part  IV. 

Dissertation  on  Liberty  and  Ne- 
cessity. 

Fenelon's  Philosophical  Works. 

Ferguson's  Principles  of  Moral  Sci- 
ence. 

Fleming's  Necessity  not  the  Origin 
of  Evil. 

Foster's  (Dr.  James)  Sermons. 

Gales's  Court  of  the  Gentiles.  Part 
IV.  Bk.  3. 

Gilbert's  (Jos.)  Reply  to  Bennet. 

Glanvil's  Lux  Orientalis. 

Grove  on  the  Wisdom  of  God*. 

Hussey's  (Christopher)  Sermons. 

Jeffrey's  (John)  Sermons. 

Jenvns's  (Soame)  Enq.  into  the  Origin 
of  Evil. 


INDEX  TO  AUTHORS. 


561 


Johnson's  (Dr.  S.)  Rev.  of  S.  J.'s  En- 
quiry. 

King's"  (Abp.)  Origin  of  Evil. 

Law  (E.)  on  the  Origin  of  Evil. 

Lovett's  Cause  of  Evil,  Physical  and 
Moral. 

Miiller's  Christian  Doctrine  of  Sin. 

New  Englander.   1  :  110. 

Placette'^s  Refutation  of  Bayle. 

Priestley's  Disquisitions. 

Princeton  Review.   14  :  529. 

Shepherd's  iSTature  and  Origin  of  Evil. 

Smith's  (John  Pye)  Sermons. 

Squiers's  Problem  Solved.  (Not 
quite. ) 


Stillingfleet's  Origines  Sacraa.   Bk.  3, 
ch.  3. 

Todd's  (H.  J.)  Declarations  of  the  Re- 
formers. 

Universalist  Quarterly.    4  :  221. 

West  on  Moral  Agency. 

Williams's    Hypothesis    Respecting, 
etc. 

Vindication  of  do. 

Young's  Evil  not  from  God.   (One  of 
the  last  and  best. ) 
A  good  key  to   the  controversy,  on 

this    subject  may  be    found  in  Chis- 

sold's  Connection  of  Theology,  Psycho- 
logy, and  Physiology. 


LIGHT    OF    NATURE. 


Chauvin  de  Religione  Naturali. 
Creutzer  de  Leibnitii  Doctrina. 
Diogenes  Laertius   de   Vitis  Philoso- 

phorum. 
Grotius  de  Yeritate. 
Hammii  Scrutatio  Principii  primi. 
Hansennii  (Petr.)  Meditationes. 
Mori  (Henr.)  Demonstrationes. 

Enchiridion  Ethicum. 

Pfhanner,   Systema   Theologia  Gen- 

tilis. 
Platonis  Opera.     (De  Rebus  divinis, 

etc.) 
Plutarchi  Moralia. 
Poiretus  de  Deo. 
Proclus  de  Theologia  Platonica. 
Puifendorf  de  Officiis  Hominis  et  Ci- 

vis. 
Reimar's  (H.  S.)   Naturalische  Reli- 
gion. 
Simon  (Jules)  Religion  naturelle. 
Yelthusii  de  Cultu  naturali. 
YossiusdePhilosophia  et  Philos.  Sec- 

tis. 

de  Theologia  Gentili. 

Walch's  (C.  W^.F.)  Natiirlichen  Got- 

tesgelehrtheit. 
Wolfii  Theologia  Naturalis. 
Abernethy's  (John)  Sermons. 
Barr's  Summary  of  Natural  Religion. 
Bates's  (William)  Works. 
Baxter's  (Andrew)  Matho. 
Blackwell's  (Thos.)  Sacred  Scheme. 
Bourn's  (Samuel)  Sermons. 
Bovle  Lectures  for  1692,    1695,  1704, 

1713,  1717,  1721,  1747,  1766,  1778, 

1808,*  1847. 
Boyle  (Robt.)  on  the  Yeneration  due 

to  God. 
Broughton's     Christianity     Distinct 

from  the  Religion  of  Nature. 


Brown's  Natural  and  Revealed  Reli- 
gion. Bk.  1. 

Bulkley  (C.)  on  Natural  Religion. 

Bushnan's  Introd.  to  the  Study  of 
Nature. 

Calamy  on  the  Light  of  Nature. 

Charnock  (Stephen)  on  Providence. 

Cheyne's  Philos.  Principles  of  Reli- 
gion. 

Christian  Examiner.  52:117. 

Christian  Monthly  Spectator.  4 :  249. 
3 :  85. 

Clarke's  (S.)  Boyle  Lectures.   1704. 

Conybeare's  Defence  of  Revealed  Re- 
ligion. 

Culverwell  on  the  Light  of  Nature. 

Cumberland's  Laws  of  Nature. 

Dick's  Philosophy  of  Religion. 

Dryden  (J.)  on  Natural  Religion. 

Duncan's  (J.  S.)  Botano-Theology. 

Duncan's  (H.)  Sacred  Philosophy. 

Durham's  Astro-Theology. 

Physico-Theology. 

Edwards  on  the  Causes  of  Atheism. 

Ellis  on  the  Knowledge  of  Divine 
Things. 

Erbury's  Confutation  of  Deism. 

Fiddes's  Theologia  Speculativa. 

Foster's  (James)  Discourses  on  Sociiil 
Yirtue. 

Gardner's  (James)  Sermons. 

Gastrell  on  Natural  Religion. 

Gerard's  Evidences  of  Nat.  and  Rev. 
Religion. 

Glover's  (P.)  Tracts. 

Greenfield's  Connection  of  Nat.  and 
Rev.  Religion. 

Hale's  (Chief  Justice)  K  lowledgo  of 
God. 

Hallet's  Future  State  n  t  proved  by 
the  Light  of  Nature. 


36 


562 


INDEX  TO  AUTHOBS. 


Halyburton's  Insufficiency  of  Natural 
Keligion. 

Harris's  Eight  Sermons  on  the  Being 
of  God. 

Hey's  (Dr.  John)  Lectures. 

Hume's  Dialogues  on  Natural  Eeli- 
gion. 

Jack's  Mathematical  Theology. 

Karnes  (Lord)  on  Natural  Keligion. 

Law's  (W.)  Theory  of  Eeligion. 

Mackay's  Progress  of  the  Intellect. 

Mole's  Obligations  of  Natural  Keli- 
gion. 

Morehead's  Dialogues. 

Nye  on  Natural  and  Revealed  Eeli- 
gion. 

Orr's  (J.)  Theory  of  Eeligion. 

Parker's  Defence  of  Natural  and  Ee- 
vealed  Eeligion. 

Peabody's  (A.  P.)  Lowell  Institute 
Lectures.   1864. 

Eamsaj^'s  Principles  of  Eeligion. 

Scott's  Christian  Life.  Part  II. 

Sherlock  on  Providence. 

Simon  on  Nat.  Eeligion.  Trans,  by 
Marsden. 

Squiers's  Natural  and  Eevealed  Eeli- 
gion. 

Stanley's  Lives  of  the  Philosophers. 

Stillingfleet's  Orio-ines  Sacraa. 


Sturm's  Keflections  on  the  "Works  of 
God. 

Stuynoe's  Salvation  by  Christ  Alone. 

Sykes's  Connection  of  Nat.  and  Eev. 
Eeligion. 

Taylor's  (Jer.)  Ductor  Dubitantium. 

Necessity  of  Faith  in  Christ. 

Tenison  against  Hobbes. 

Totham's  Scale  of  Truth. 

Tucker's  Light  of  Nature  Pursued. 
(Profound  and  clear.  First  pub- 
lished under  the  name  of  Edward 
Search.) 

Tunstall's  Natural  and  Eevealed  Eeli- 
gion. 

Twell's  Vindic.  of  the  Gospel  of  Mat- 
thew. 

Ty tier's  Essays  on  Important  Sub- 
jects. 

Watson's  Popular  Evidences  of  Nat. 
Eeligion. 

Watts's  (Isaac)  Berry  Street  Sermons. 

Wayland's  Elements  of  Moral  Sci- 
ence. 

Wliiston's  Astronomical  Principles  of 
Eeligion. 

Willatts  on  the  Eeligion  of  Nature. 

Wilson's  (Jos.)  Letters  on  Eeligion. 
(A  good  introduction  to  Butler's 
Analogy.) 


LIMITATIONS    OP    HUMAN   THOUGHT. 


Abercrombie's  Intellectual  Powers. 

Baker's  Eeliections  upon  Learning. 

Balguy's  (John)  Discourses. 

Bourn's  (Samuel)  Sermons. 

Boyle's  Use  of  Eeason  in  Eeligion. 

Brown's  Pi-ocedure  and  Extent  of  the 
Human  Understanding. 

[Calamy  (Ed.)]  Philologus's  Use  and 
Abuse  of  Eeason. 

Campbell  (Abp.)  on  the  Necessity  of 
Eevelation. 

Clark's  (John)  Office  of  Reason  in  Ee- 
ligion. 

Croft's  Bampton  Lectures.     1786. 

Curry's  Confirmation  of  Faith. 

Davies's  (J.)  Estimate  of  the  Human 
Mind. 

Eclectic  Eeview.   1859  :  225. 

Ellis's  Knowledge  of  Divine  Things. 

Ferguson's  Interest  of  Eeason  in  Re- 
ligion. 

Gale's  Court  of  the  Gentiles.  Part  III. 

Gilderdale  on  Natural  Eeligion. 

Glanvill's  Vanity  of  Dogmatiz  ng. 

Holden's  (Lawrence)  Sermons. 

Letters  between  Ant.  Tuckey  and  B. 
Whichcot. 

Manning's  (James)  Sermons. 


Manningham's    Use    of    Speculative 

Philosophy  in  Eeligion. 
Mansel's  Bampton  Lectures.     1858. 
Nelson's  (G.)  Use  of  Human  Eeason. 
Newton's  (Bp.)  Dissertations. 
Norris's  Mysteries  of  Christianity. 
Princeton  Eeview.     32  :  648. 
Eust  on  the  Use  of  Eeason. 
Sharp's  (Abp.)  Sermons. 
Smith's    True  Method   of  Obtaining 

Divine  Knowledge.' 
Stephen's  Human  Nature  Delineated. 
Stone's  (Edward)  Sermons. 
Tuckey's  Letters. 

Twinning's  Eeason  in  Eegard  to  Eeve- 
lation. 
Van  Mildort's  Boyle  Lectures.     1802. 
Wardlaw's  Christian  Ethics. 
Whately's  (Bp.)  Sermons. 
Whichcot's  Aphorisms  in  Eeligion. 
AVhiston's    Eeason    and    Philos.    no 

Enemies. 
Witsius  on  the  Abuse  of  Eeason. 
Worseley's  P.  of  Eeason  in  Eeligion, 

deduced  from  the   Sermon   on   the 

Mount. 
Young's  Province  of    Eeason.     (An 

able  criticism  on  Mansell.) 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


b\j^ 


ATHEISiM. 


Adams  on  the  Existence  of  God. 

Alexander's  (J.)  Observations.  (Ag. 
Hobbes.) 

Allen's  Oracles  of  Eeason. 

Allen's  (Thomas)  Modern  Atheism. 

Balguy's  Sermons  and  Tracts. 

Batchellor'a  (H.)  Logic  of  Atheism. 

Bayle's  Dictionary.  (Under  Diago- 
ras,  Theodoras,  and  Vaninus.) 

Beecher's  ^Lyman)  Atheism,  consid- 
ered theologically  and  politically. 

Bentley's  (liichard)  Sermons. 

Berkeley's  (Bp.)  Works. 

Boyle  Lectures.  (From  1692  to  the 
present.) 

Boyle's  Inquiry  into  Eeceived  No- 
tions. 

Essay  on  Final  Causes. 

Buchanan's  Modern  Atheism  :  as  ex- 
hibited under  the  Forms  of  Panthe- 
ism, Materialism,  Secularism,  and 
Development.     1855. 

Carleton's  Darkness  of  Atheism. 

Char  nock's  Works. 

Cheyne's  Philosophical  Principles. 

Christian  Examiner.   50  :  309.  78  : 

Clarendon's  Keply  to  Hobbes. 

Clarke  on  the  Being  and  Attributes 
of  God. 

Cudworth's  Intellectual  Sj'steni. 

Abridged  by  Dr.  Wise. 

Cumberland's  Law  of  Nature. 

Delany's  Revelation  examined  with 
Candor. 

Doddridge's  Lectures.     Part  II. 

Dix's  (Morgan)  Lectures  on  Panthe- 
ism. 

Durham's  Demonstration. 

Dwight's  Discourses.  Disc.  1,  2,  and  3. 

Eclectic  Eeview.    New  series.   7:329. 

Edwards  on  the  Visible  Structure  of 
the  World. 

Elliot's  Folly  of  Atheism. 

Foster  (James)  on  Natural  Religion. 

Fotherby's  Atheomastix. 

Gardner's  Doomsday  Book. 

Grant's  (Brewin)  Public  Discussion 
with  G.  J.  Holyoake,  in  1854. 

Godwin's  Lectures  on  the  A.  Contro- 
versy. 

Gregory's  Modern  Atheism. 

Grew's  Cosmologia  Sacra. 

Hale's  (Sir  Matthew)  Origin  of  Man. 

Hall's  (Robt.)  Modern  Inlidelity. 

Harris  on  Atheistical  Objections. 

Hattecliffe's  God  or  Nothing. 

Hill's  Lectures  and  Reflections. 


Howel's  Spirit  of  Prophecy.  (Agt. 
Hobbes.) 

Howe's  (John)  Works. 

Hunt's  Essay  on  Pantheism. 

Lectures  on  Secularism,  by  Gregory, 
Condor,  Savage,  and  Mellor. 

Lesser  s  Insecto-Theology. 

Lewis's  (Tayler)  Plato  against  the 
Atheists. 

McAU's  Logic  of  Atheism. 

McLaurin's  Essays. 

McCuUock's  (John)  Sermons. 

Mill  on  the  Attempted  Application 
of  Pantheistic  Principles  to  the  His- 
toric Criticism  of  the  Gospel. 

Monthly  Eeview.    54  :  163. 

More's  (Henry)  Philosophical  Works. 
Part  I. 

Nelson's  Cause  and  Cure  of  Infidelity. 

Nieuwentyt's  Religious  Philosopher. 

Nichol's  Conference  with  a  Theist. 

Parker  on  God  and  Providence. 

Pattison's  Anti-Nazarenus. 

Pilling  on  the  Existence  of  God. 

Pironett's  Disquisitions.  (Against 
Hobbes.) 

Phillips's  Dis.Historico-Philosophica. 

Ray's  Phj'sico-Theology.  (Great,  and 
most  useful.) 

Saisset's  Modern  Pantheism.   1863. 

Seed's  (Jeremiah)  Sermons. 

Sparks's  Antidote  of  Atheism. 

Talmot's  (Bp.)  Sermons. 

Temple's  Doctrine  of  Leviathan. 

Tenison's  (Abp.)  Sermons.  (Agt. 
Hobbes.) 

Thompson's  (R.  A.)  Christian  Theism. 

Tower's  Atheismus  Vapulans. 

Tullock's  Tbeism.  Burnett  Prize  Es- 
say.  1854. 

Vaughn's  (J.)  Lectures.     Lcct.  4. 

Vince's  Laws  and  Constitutions  of 
the  Heavenly  Bodies.  (Uses  pro- 
found astronomical  knowledge  in 
the  simplest  language.) 

Ward's  (Bp.)  Essay  toward  an  Evic- 
tion, etc. 

Whish  on  the  First  Cause. 

AVise's  (Tho.)  Reason  and  Philosophy 
of  A. 

Wisheart's  (William)  Sermons. 

Wharton  (Francis)  on  Theism. 

Woolsey's  Unreasonableness  of  Athe- 
ism. 

The  above  are  a  very  small  speci- 
men of  the  numerouswriters  on  this 

subject. 


56i 


INDEX  TO  AUTHOBS. 


REVEALED  THEOLOGY. 


NECESSITY    OF   DIVINE    REVELATION. 


Clemens  Alex.,  Exhortatio  ad 
Gentes. 

Justin  Martyr,  Apologia. 

Cohortatio  ad  Gnecos. 

Dialogus  cum  Tryphone. 

Auberlen,  die  Gottliclie  OfFenbarung. 

Bretschneider's  Systemat.  Entwicke- 
lung. 

Campbell,  de  Vanitate  Luminis  Na- 
turae. 

Laget,  Sermons  sur  divers  Sujets. 

Turretini  (Jo.  Alphonsi)  Cogitationes. 

Appleton's  Works.    Lects.  11,  12,  13. 

Baker's  (T.)  Reflections  on  Learning. 

Barrow's  Necessity  of  Christianity. 

Brown's  System  of  Nat.  and  Revealed 
Religion. 

Bundy's  (Richard)  Sermons. 

Chandler's  Revelation  and  Society. 

Charnock's  (S.)  Works. 

Christian  Review.   12  :  186. 

Conybeare  on  Revealed  Religion. 

Delany's  Revelation  examined  with 
Candor. 

Edgecombe's  Reason  an  InsufScient 
Guide. 

Ellis's  Knowledge  of  Divine  Things 
not  from  Reason. 

Farrer's  Mission  of  Christ. 

Foster's  (Dr.  James)  Discourses. 

Fuller's  (And.)  Part  of  a  Body  of  Di- 
vinity. 

Gale's  Court  of  the  Gentiles. 


Gastrell's  (F.)  Boyle  Lectures.   1793. 

Glanvill's  Vanity  of  Dogmatizing. 

Halyburton's  Natural  Religion  In- 
sufficient. 

Hamilton  ( W.  T.)  on  the  Pentateuch. 

Hey's  Lectures.     Bk.  ].,  ch.  12. 

Jenkins  on  the  Christian  Religion. 

Jones's  Bampton  Lectures.     1821. 

Law's  Considerations. 

Leland's  Advantage  and  Necessity  of 
Revelation. 

Mant  on  the  Gospel. 

Miller's  Division  of  Scripture. 

Morehead's  (R. )  Sermons. 

Nares's  Evidence  versus  Reason. 

Norman  on  the  Necessity  of  Revela- 
tion. 

Penrose's  Bampton  Lectures.     1808. 

Taylor's  Apology  of  Ben  Mordecai. 

Umfreville's  Excellence  and  Neces- 
sity, etc. 

Vincent's  (William)  Sermons. 

Warbnrton's  Divine  Legation  of 
Moses. 

Watson's  Tracts. 

Watts's  Strength  and  Weakness  of 
Human  Reason. 

West's  Defence  of  the  Christian  Rev- 
elation. 

Whiteley's  Essaj's.  (Praised  by  Por- 
teus.) 

Witherspoon's  (John)  Works.  Vol.  2. 

Woodgate's  Bampton  Lectures.  1838. 


CHRISTIANITY. 


The  Fathers  here  cited  are  arranged 
in  chronological  order. 
Hernias,   Philosophi    Philosophorum 

Irrisio. 
Justin  Martyr,  Parffinesis  ad  Grsecos. 

Oratio  ad  Grsecos. 

Apologia  pro  Christianis. 

A])ol.  secunda  pro  Christianis. 

de  Monarehia  Dei. 

Dialogus  cum  Tryphone. 

Epistola  ad  Diognetum. 

TertuUian,      Apologeticus      adversus 

Gentes. 
ad  Nationes. 


TertuUian,  de  Testimonio  Animte. 

ad  Scapulam. 

adversus  JudsBOS. 

Oratio  ad  Catechumenos. 

Athenagoras,  Legatio  pro  Christianis. 

Atheniensis  Apologia. 

de  Mortuorum  Resurrectione. 

Theophilus,  contra  Calumniatores. 
Clemens      (Alex.),    Protrepticon    ad 

Gentes. 
Minucius  Felix,  Octavius. 
Origen,  contra  Celsum. 
Cyprian,  de  Idololatrium  Vanitate. 
Testimonia  ad  Quirinum. 


INDEX   TO   AUTHOBS. 


bQl 


Lactantius,  de  Mortibus  Persecuto- 
rum. 

Athanasius,  Oratio  contra  Gentes. 

Cyril  (Alex.),  contra  Julianum. 

Eusebius,  Preparatio  Evangelica. 

Demonstratio  Evangelica. 

Chrysostom,  ad  versus  Judieos. 

contra  Gentiles. 

Ambrose,  Kesponsio  Eelationi  Sym- 
machi. 

Augustine,  de  Vera  Eeligione. 

cle  Moribus  Ecclesise  Catholicse. 

ad  vers  us  JudiBOS. 

de  Givitate  Dei. 

adversus  Paganos. 

Arnobius,  adversus  Gentes 

Arndtius,  de  Vero  Christianismo. 

Bergier,  Preuves  du  Christianisme. 

Bernard,  de  I'Excellence  de  la  Rel. 
cbret. 

Boesnier,  Preservatif  contre  I'lrre- 
ligion. 

Bretschneider's  Systematiscbe  Ent- 
wickelung. 

Buddei  Miscellanea  Sacrorum.  Part  I. 

Cartwright,  Certanien  Roligioniim. 

Chateaubriand,  Genie  du  Cliri-f  an- 
isme. 

Curcellii  (Steph.)  Opera. 

Du  Plessis  de  Veritate  Relig.  Chris- 
tianas. 

Edenius  de  Veritate  Relig.  Chris- 
tiante. 

Fabricius  de  Veritate  Relig.  Chris- 
tianas. 

Gotti  de  Veritate,  etc.    (Acta  Erud.) 

Grotius  de  Veritate  Relig.  Christ. 
("Equally  approved  by  Catholics 
and  Protestants." — C.  Butler.  A 
fine  edit.,  with  English  notes  and 
illustrations  by  Middleton.  Printed 
1855.) 

Hornbeckii  Summa  Controversiarum 
Relig. 

Houtville,  la  Religion  chretienne 
prouve  par  les  Faits.  (Highly  es- 
teemed. It  is  preceded  by  an  ace. 
of  the  methods  taken  hy  writers  for 
and  against  Christianity.) 

Huetii  Demonstratio  Evangelica. 

Kortholti  Grundlichen  Beweis,  etc. 

Lamy,  Preuves  evidentes  de  la  Ve- 
rite,  etc. 

Le  Clerc,  Bibliotheque  ancienne  et 
moderne. 

Limborch,  de  Veritate,  etc. 

Malebranche,  Conversations  chreti- 
ennes. 

Pascal,     Pensees    sur     la     Religion. 


("Contains  the  germ  of  all  that 
can  be  said  for  or  against  the  Chris- 
tian religion  " — Ventouillac.) 

Picteti  Dissertationes  Theologicae. 

Sagittarii  Intro,  in  Hist.  Ecclesiasticae. 

Schuberti  de  Veritate,  etc. 

Stattleri  Demonstratio  Evangelica. 

Tappen,  Wahrheit  der  christlichen 
Religion. 

Tollner's  Gottl.  Eingeb.  der  heiligen 
Schrift. 

Turretini  Dissertationes. 

Abbadie's  Truth  of  Christ.  Trans. 
by  Booth. 

Addison's  Evidences,  etc.  (Many  edi- 
tions.) 

Alexander's  (W.  L.)  Christ  and  Chris- 
tianity. 

Alley's  Vindiciie  Christians.  (Com- 
parison of  the  Greek,  Roman,  Hin- 
du, Mohammedan,  and  Christian 
religions.) 

Allix's  Reflections  on  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. 

Apology  of  Ben  Mordecai.  (Power- 
ful; with  valuable  notes  by  Henry 
Taylor.) 

Appleton's  "Works.  Lectures  18  to  25. 

Apthorp's  Obser.  on  Gibbon's  Decl. 
and  Fall. 

Arndt's  True  Christianity. 

Bampton  Lectures.  (Particularly  for 
1780,  '84,  '86,  '87,  '88,  '92,  '<J4,  '97, 
'98,  1803,  '08,  '11,  '12,  '23,  '25,  '31.) 

Bassett's  Reasonableness  of  Revela- 
tion. 

Bates's  (William)  Works.   Chap.  5. 

Baxter's  (Rich.)  Reasons  of  the  Chris- 
tian Religion.  (Dr.  S.Johnson  pro- 
nounced it  the  best  work  on  the 
subject.) 

Bean's  Evidences,  etc. 

Beattie's  Evidences,  etc.     (Popular.) 

Nature     and    Immutabilitv    of 

Truth. 

Benson's  Hulsean  Lectures.     1820. 

Biscoe's  Acts  of  the  Apostles  con- 
firmed from  other  Authors. 

Bolton's  Evidences.  (Prize  Essay. 
1852.) 

Bonnet's  Philosoph.  and  Critical  In- 
quiries. (Refutes  modern  French 
philosophy.) 

Bovle  (Robt.)  Lectures.  (Commenced 
1692.) 

Broadley's  Christianity  a  Divine  Rev- 
elation. 

Brown's  Essay  on  the  Characteristics. 

Burgess's  (Bp.)  Easter  Catechism. 


b6\j 


INDEX   TO  AUTHORS. 


Butler's  Analogv  of  Kelig.  and  Nat. 
Part  IT. 

Carey's  (P.  M.)  Evid.  and  Corrup- 
tions of  C. 

Chalmers's  Evidences,  etc. 

Channing's  (W.  E.)  Dudleian  Lec- 
ture. 

Chelsum's  Remarks  on  Gibbon's 
Kome. 

Chichester  on  Deism. 

Chirke's  (Dr.  Sam.)  Eefiections  on 
Amyntor. 

Truth  and  Certainty  of  the  Chr. 

Eel. 

Sermons. 

Cook's  Hi.?torical  View  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Croly's  Three  Cycles  of  Revelation. 
(Argues  the  parallelism  of  the  pa- 
triarchal, Jewish,  and  Christian 
dispensations.)  ("More  fanciful 
than  sound." — Brit.  Critic.) 

Crosskey's  Defence  of  Religion. 

Dalrymple  on  the  Causes  wiiich  Gib- 
bon assigns  for  the  Progress  of 
Christianity. 

Davies's  Exam,  of  the  Fifteenth  and 
Sixteenth  Chapters  of  Gibbon. 

Doddridge's  (P.)  Evid.  (Many  edi- 
tions.) 

Duchall's  Presumptive  Evidence,  etc. 
("Singular  merit."— Kippis.  ) 

Duguet's  Principles  of  Relig.  Tr.  by 
Lalby. 

Durham's  Christianity  the  Friend  of 
Man. 

D wight's  (Prest.)  Discourses. 

Edwards  (Dr.  John)  on  the  Authority, 
etc. 

Fawcett's  (James)  Sermons. 

Fell's  (John)  Lectures. 

Foote's  Leading  Aspects  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Fuller's  Gospel  its  own  "Witness. 

Gastrell's  Necessity  and  Certainty  of 
Religion. 

Gisbourne's  Survey  of  Relig.  (Ad- 
mired.) 

Goddard  on  the  Mental  Condition 
necessary  to  a  Due  Inquiry  into 
Religious  Evidence. 

Gray's  (Robt.)  Ten  Discourses. 

Green's  (Robt.)  Demonstration  of  the 
Truth  of  Christianity. 

Nine  Discourses. 

Norrisean  Prize  Essay.  1796. 

Greenfield's  Evid.  by  Inductive  Phi- 
losophy. 

Gruw's  Cosmoloii'ia  Sacra. 


Grotius  on  the  Truth  of  the  Ch.  Re- 
ligion. 

Gurney's  Evidences,  etc. 

Hale's  Influence  of  Gibbon's  Five 
Causes. 

Hammond's  Reasonableness  of  the 
Christian  Religion. 

Hampden's  Essay  on  the  Evidences, 
etc.  (A  worthy  companion  to  But- 
ler's Analogy.) 

Harness's  Connection  of  C.  and  Hap- 
piness. 

Hey's  Lectures  on  Divinity.   Vol.  I. 

Hodge's  Summary  of  Corroborative 
Evid. 

Hulsean  Lectures.  1820,  1821,  1831, 
1837. 

Hunter's  (Henry)  Evidences,  etc. 

Inglis's  Vindic.  of  the  Christian 
Faith. 

Ireland's  (J.)  Chr.  and  Paganism 
Compared. 

Jenkins's  Reasonableness  and  Cer- 
tainty, etc. 

Jortin's  Truth  of  the  Christian  Re- 
ligion. 

Knox's  (Vicesimus)  Christian  Phi- 
losophy. 

Lardner's  Credibility  of  the  Gospel 
History. 

Leslie's  Short  Method  with  the  Jews. 

Short  Method  with  the  Deists. 

Truth  of  C.  Demonstrated. 

Less's  (G.)  Demonstration  of  the 
Truth  of  the  Christian  Religion. 

Littleton's  Conversion  of  St.  Paul. 

Locke's  Reasonableness  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Mcllvaine's  Evid.  (A  brief  compihi- 
tion.) 

Maltby's  Illustrations.  (Eight  good 
dissertatious.) 

Marsh's  Evid.  and  Nature  of  the  C. 
Religion. 

Middle  ton's  Miscellaneous  Works. 

Moore's  (D.)  Chr.  Vindicirted.  (Cam- 
bridge prize  essay.) 

Nares's  Evidences,  etc.  (Able  and 
original.) 

Osterwald's  Grounds  and  Principles, 
etc. 

Paley's  Evidences,  etc. 

Hora3  Paulinse. 

Parker's  Demonstration  of  the  Divine 
Authority,  etc. 

Penrose's  Evidences,  etc.,  from  its 
Wisdom. 

Porteus's  Summary  of  the  Evidences, 
etc.  (Good  for  young  people.) 


INDEX   TO  AUTHORS. 


567 


Price's  (Kich.)  Dissertations.    Diss.  4. 

Priestley's  Letters  to  a  Philosophical 
Unbeliever. 

Pioberts's  Vindication,  etc.  (Reply  to 
Volney's  Ruins.) 

Robinson's  (Tho.)  Nature  and  Evi- 
dence, etc. 

Rosse's  (Earl  of)  Proof  of  the  C. 
Religion. 

Ryland's  (John)  Essays. 

tSalsbury's  Strictures  on  Gibbon's 
Rome. 

Scott's  (Tho.)  Works. 

Seller's  Reasonableness  of  Belief. 

Sharp's  (Gregory)  Defence  of  C. 

Sheppard's  Divine  Origin,  etc.  (De- 
duced from  evidences  which  are  not 
founded  on  the  authenticity  of 
Scripture.) 

Sherlock  on  the  Resurrection  of  Christ. 

Simmes's  Nature  and  Reception  of 
Chr. 

Smith's  (J.  Pye)  Testimony  to  the 
Messiah. 

Sacrifice  and  Priesthood  of  Christ. 

Sprague's  Contrast  between  Christi- 
anity and  other  Systems. 

Steele's  (J.'i  Philosophy  of  the  Evi- 
dences. 


Stephens's  Comparison  of  Christianity 

with  other  Systems. 
Stillingfieet's  Origines  Sacr^e. 
Sumner's  (Bp.)  Nature  and  Reception 

of  C. 
Sykes's  (A.  A.)  Truth  of  Christianity. 
Thompson's   Types,    Prophecies,  and 

Miracles. 
Tillotson's  Sermons. 
Tunstall's  Acade.mica. 

Lectures. 

Warburton's     Divine     Legation    of 

Moses. 
Watson's  (Bp.)  Apology.     (Replv  to 

Gibbon.) 

Tracts. 

Well  wood's   Authority   of  the    Nev/ 

Testament. 
West's  Defence  of  Revelation. 
Whitby's  Necessity,  Usefulness,  etc. 
Wilson's    (J.)    Reasonableness  of  C. 

(An  able  development  of  the  princi- 
ples of  Butler's  Analogy.) 

Tho  above  are  but  a  fraction  of  the 
writers  on  this  subject,  but  are  abun- 
dantly sufficient  for  the  purpose  of 
this  work.  See  a  full  list  of  writers 
for  and  against  Christianity,  up  to  th:j 
14th  century,  in  Cave's  Hist.  Litc- 
rai'ia. 


MIRACLES. 


Bragge  on  Our  Saviour's  Miracles. 

Bulkley  on  the  Miracles  of  Christ. 

Campbell  on  Miracles.  (Answer  to 
Hume.) 

Chapman's  M.  the  Proper  Credentials, 
etc. 

Clarke's  Boyle  Lectures.     1705. 

CoUj^er  (W.  B.)  on  Scripture  Mira- 
cles. 

Cox's  (R.  C.)  Lectures  on  Miracles. 

Ditton  on  the  Resurrection  of  Christ. 

Douglass's  Criterion  of  True  Miracles. 

Doyle's  Answer  to  Woolston. 

Encyclopaedia  Britannica.  Art.  "Mir- 
acles." 

Entick's  Evidences  of  Christianity. 

Farmer's  Dissertation  on  Miracles. 
.(Great.) 

Fleetwood's  Essays  on  Miracles. 

Hallett's  Nature,  Kind,  and  Number 
of  Christ's  Miracles. 

Hovey's  (Alvah)  The  Miracles  of 
Christ. 

Howarth's  Hulsean  Lectures.     1836. 

Humphrey's  (W.G.)  Discourses  on  M. 

Jameson's  Analogy  between  the  Mir- 
acles and  Doctrines  of  Scripture. 


Jepton's  Reality  of  our  Saviour's 
Miracles. 

Jortin's  Boyle  Leetures.     1750. 

Lawson  (Cha.)  on  the  Miracles  of 
Christ. 

Le  Bas  (Cha.  W.)  on  Miracles. 

Locke  on  Miracles. 

Mackenzie  (M.  J.)  on  Miracles. 

Mant's  (Bp.)  Works. 

Mai'sden's  Hulsean  Lectures.     1844. 

Mayo  on  the  Miracles  of  our  Lord. 

McGuire's  Miracles  of  Christ. 

Mozley's  Bampton  Lectures.     1800. 

Myers's  Mosaic,  Historic,  and  Pro- 
phetic M. 

Osiilvie's  Bampton  Lectures.     1836. 

Owen's  (H.)  Bovle  Lectures.  1769, 
1770,  1771. 

Peabody's  (A.  P.)  Lectures  before  the 
Lowell  Institute.     Lect.  3. 

Penrose's  Use  of  Scripture  M.  (Verv 
able.) 

Ray's  Vindication  of  Christ's  Mira- 
cles. 

Reinhard  on  Miracles. 

Rutherford's  Credibility  of  Miracles. 
(Much  valued.) 


568 


INDEX  TO  AUTHORS. 


Seaton's  Compendious  View  of  Mira- 
cles. 

Sherloclv's  Trial  of  the  Witnesses. 

Smallbrooke  on  Miracles. 

iStebbins's  Defence  of  Scripture  His- 
tory. 

Stevenson  on  the  Miracles  of  Christ. 

Sutton's  Christ's  Miracles  no  Alle- 
gories. 

Sykes's  Credibility  of  Miracles. 

Taylor's  Apology  of  Ben  Mordecai. 
(Strong.) 

Thompson's  (Edw.)  Bulwarks  of 
Christianity. 

Trench  (Francis)  on  the  Miracles  of 
our  Lord. 

Van  Mildert's  Boyle  Lectures.  1802- 
1804. 

Vince's  Credibility  of  Scripture  Mira- 
cles.    (Masterly  reply  to  Hume.) 

Wardlaw  (Ralph)  on  Miracles. 

West  on  the  Resurrection. 

Westcott's  Characteristics  of  the  Gos- 
pel Miracles. 

Weston  on  the  Rejection  of  the  Chris- 
tian Miracles  by  the  Heathen. 

Westcott's  Elements  of  the  Gospel 
Harmony. 

Miracles   of  the   first   ages  of    the 
Church : 
Pro. 
Augustine  de  Civitate  Dei. 
Justin  Martjr,  Apologia. 

Dialog,  cum  Tryphone. 

Irenseus,    Opus   eruditissimum.      Ed. 

Erobenii. 
Minucius  Felix,  Octavius. 
Origen,  contra  Celsum. 
TertuUian,  ad  Scapulam. 
Mosheim,   de    Rebus  ante  Constanti- 

num. 
Pfannerus,  de  Donis  Miraculis. 
Schulz's     Geistesgaben      der     ersten 

Christen. 
Balmer's  (Robt.)  Academic  Lectures. 

Pulpit  Discourses. 

Barrington's  (J.  S. )  Miscellanea  Sacra. 
Boys 's  Suppressed  Evidence ;  or,  Proof 

from  the  Records  of  the    Fathers, 

Waldenses,  etc. 
Brook's   Exam,  of  Middleton's  Free 

Enquiry. 
Burton's  Eccles.  Hist,  of  the  2d  and  3d 

Centuries. 
Chapman  on  the  Miraculous  Powers, 

etc. 


Chapman's  Jesuit  Cabal  Farther 
Opened. 

Church  (Tho.)  on  the  Miraculous 
Powers,  etc. 

Appeal  to  the  Unprejudiced. 

Dodwell's  Free  Answer  to  Middle- 
ton. 

Douglas's  Criterion.  (Excellent.  Ex- 
poses Hume.) 

Fleury's  Eccles.  Hist.  (An  essay  at 
the  end.) 

Heathcote's  Animadversions  on  Mid- 
dleton. 

Jackson's  Remarks  on  Middleton's 
Inquiry. 

Jenkins's  (Tho.)  Exam,  of  M.'s  "In- 
quiry." 

Newman's  (J.  H.)  Miracles  of  Eccl. 
History. 

Parker's  Miraculous  Powers  of  the 
Early  Fathers. 

Rawlinson's  Bampton  Lectures.  1859. 

Reeves's  Apologies  of  Justin,  Tertul- 
lian,  and  Minucius. 

Rutherford  on  Miracles. 

Stebbins's  Observations  on  Middle- 
ton. 

Sykes's  Credibility  of  Miracles. 

Two  Questions  impartially  con- 
sidered. 

Walton's  Miraculous  Powers  of  the 
Church. 

Whiston  on  Demoniacs. 

on  the  Exact  Time  when  Mirac- 
ulous Gifts  ceased  in  the  Church. 

Con. 

Jenkins's  Examination  of  Dodwell's 
reply  to  Middleton. 

Middleton's  Free  Inquiry  into  the 
Miraculous  Powers  supposed  to  have 
existed  in  the  Church. 

Vindication.     (Reply  to  Dodwell 

and  Church.) 

Reply  to  Stebbins  and  Chapman. 

Reply  to  Mr.  Toll. 

North  British  Rev.     Vol.  4. 

Tillotson's  (Abp.)  Sermons. 

Toll's  Defence  of  Middleton's  Free 
Inquiry. 

Yates's  Defence  of  Middleton's  In- 
quiry. 

See  a  notice  of  this  controversy  in  a 
note,  by  Dr.  Kippis,  to  Doddridge's 
Lectures,  Part  VI.  ;  and  in  Joseph 
Clarke's  Theological  Treatises. 


INDEX   TO  AUTHORS. 


569 


PROPHECY. 


Arnold  on  the  Interpretation  of  Pro- 
phecy. 

Barker's  P.  concerning  ^Messiah. 

Bates's  Use  and  Intent  of  Prophecy. 

Bickersteth's  Guide  to  tlie  Prophecies. 

Bouchier  on  Prophecy  and  its  Ful- 
filment. 

Brooks's  (J.  W.)  Elements  of  Pro- 
phetical Interpretation.  (A  conven- 
ient compend.) 

Brown's  (J.)  Harmony  of  Prophecy. 

Butler's  (W.  J.)  Testimony  of  His- 
tory. 

Caulfleld's  Fall  of  Babylon. 

Chandler's  Antiq.  and  Auth.  of  the  P. 
of  Dan. 

Chauncey  (W.  S.)  on  Unaccomplished 
Prophecies. 

Clarke's  (S.)  Connection  of  the  Pro- 
phecies. 

Glaj'ton's  Dissertation?  on  Prophecy. 

Davidson's  (D.)  Test  of  Prophecy. 

De  Burgh's  Early  Prophecies  of  a 
Kedeemer. 

Dobb's  Prophecies  which  have  been 
fulfilled. 

Duflield  (Geo.)  on  the  Prophecies. 

Durell's  Parallel  Proph.  of  Jacob  and 
Moses. 

Elliott's  Warburton  Lectures.  1849 
to  1853. 

Ellis's  (W.  W.)  Proph.  relating  to 
Christ. 

Faber's  Calendar  of  the  P.  (Chiefly 
those  which  relate  to  Antichrist.) 

P.  relating  to  the  Jews. 

Fairbairn    on  P.     (Its  nature,  func- 

■    tions,  etc.) 

Frazer's  Key  to  the  Unaccomplished 
Prophecies. 

Frere's  Combined  View  of  Esdras, 
Daniel,  and  John. 

Fry  (John)  on  the  Unfulfilled  Pro- 
phecies. 

Fry's  (T. )  Scripture  Prophecies. 

Greenhill's  (Jos.)  Proph.  of  the  N. 
Testament. 

Habershon's  Connection  of  the  Pro- 
phecies of  the  Apocalypse  and 
Daniel. 

on  the  Chronological  Prophecies. 

Hardy's  Prophecies  of  the  Bible,  par- 
ticularly those  of  John. 

Hengstenberg's  Nature  of  the  Prophe- 
cies. 

Holmes's  (Robt.)  Bampton  Lectures. 
1782. 


Hoare's  (W.  H.)  Harmony  of  the 
Apocalypse  with  other  Prophecies  ; 
with  an  Outline  of  the  Various  In- 
terpretations. 

Horsley's  (Bp.)  Sermons.    Ser.  15-18. 

Prophecies  of  Messiah  dispersed 

among  the  Heathen. 

Hurd's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of 
the  Prophecies.  (Chiefly  those  re 
lating  to  Popery.) 

Jefl^'ries  on  the  Perfection  of  Religion. 

Jennings's  Jewish  Antiquities. 

Jones's  Key  to  Prophetical  Language. 

Jortin's  Boyle  Lectures.     1730. 

Jurieu  on  the  Accomplishment  of 
Prophecy.  (A  strong  attack  on 
Popery.) 

Keith's  (A.)  Signs  of  the  Times.   1833. 

Ketts's  History  the  Interpreter  of 
Prophecy.  (""Written  with  great 
elegance     and     judgment."  —  Br. 

TOMLINE.) 

Kelly's  (James)  Lectures  on  Subjects 
connected  with  Prophecy. 

Lardner's  Destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

Leach's  Lectures  on  Fulfilled  Prophe- 
cies. 

Lyall's  Propicdia  Prophetica. 

McCaul's  "VVarburton  Lectures.  1846. 
(Prophecy  as  a  Proof  of  Christian- 

ity.) 

McLaurin  on  the  P.  rel.  to  Messiah. 

McLeod  on  the  Principal  Prophecies. 

Maitland's  Connected  View  of  Pro- 
phecy. (A  valuable  collection  of 
authorities  from  the  Fathers  down 
to  1849.) 

Marsh's  Lectures.     Lect.  20,-21. 

Mead  on  the  Prophecies. 

Monthly  London  Lectures  on  Pro- 
phecy. (Able  sermons  by  Collier, 
Bird^  Pye  Smith,  Fletcher,  Orme, 
etc.) 

Newton  (Bp.)  on  P.  which  have  been 
fulfilled. 

Newton  (Sir  I.)  on  Daniel  and  thf- 
Apocal. 

Nolan 's(F.)'Warburton  Lectures.  1837. 

Philips  (J.  S.)  on  the  Interpretation 
of  Prophecy. 

Purves  on  Prophetic  Time. 

Randolph's  Prophecies  cited  in  the 
N.  Test,  compared  with  the  He- 
brew Original. 

Roberts's  Manual  of  Prophecy.  (Com- 
pares the  prophecies  with  the  events 
which  fulfilled  them.) 


570 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


Kobiusun's  Prophecies  of  the  Mes- 
siah. 

Kule's  Calculations  of  Time,  etc. 

Sharp  (Granville)  on  Several  Impor- 
tant P. 

Sherlock's  Use  and  Intent  of  Pro- 
phecy. 

Simpson's  Key  to  the  P.  (Many  edi- 
tions.) 

Smith's  (J.  Pye)  Dissertations. 

Discourses. 

Smith's  (Dr.  John)  Summary  View 
of  Prophecy.  (A  good  abstract 
from  Lowth,  Newcombe,  Newton, 
and  Blaney.) 

South wark  Morning  Lectures.  (By 
Baxter,  Powler,  Manton,  Poole, 
Owen,  etc.) 

Tavlor's  Comp,  of  Kevelation  with 
Daniel. 

Theol.  and  Lit.  Journal.  (Many  ar- 
ticles.) 

Thompson  (Ed.)  on  Prophecy  and 
Miracles. 

Thurston's  Eesearches  on  P. 

Tower's  Illustrations  of  Prophecy. 

Turner's  Origin,  Character,  and  In- 
terp.  of  P. 


T well's  Boyle  Lectures.  1733. 

Van  Mildert's  Boyle  Lectures.    1802- 
1804. 

Vint's  Dissertations  on  Prophecy. 

Wangh's  (J.  S.)  Diss,  on  the  Prophe- 
cies. 

Ward's  (Wra.)  Declensions  and  Res- 
torations of  the  Church. 

Wc'Uwood  on  Prophecy. 

Whiston's  Boyle  Lectures.     1707. 

Whitaker's    General    and    Connected 
View. 

White's    Christianity    and    Moham- 
medanism. 

Whiteley's   Scheme  and  Completion 
of  P. 

Williams's  Boyle  Lectures.   1695. 

Wilkins's  Hist,  of  the  Destruction  of 
Jerusalem  as  Connected  with  P. 

Winchester  on  the  Prophecies. 

Zouch's  Attempt   to    Illustrate  some 
of  the  Prophecies.     (Learned  and 
cautious.) 
A    "Dictionary  of  Writers  on  the 

Prophecies,"     with    the     titles,   was 

published  in  1835,  by  the  Editor  of  the 

London  Investigator.— M.  Brooks. 


PROPHECY   AS   A   PROOF   OF   REVELATION. 


Bates's  Div.  of  the  Christian  lleli- 
gion.   Ch.  4. 

Berriman's  (W.)  Sermons. 

Bonnet's  Inquiries. 

Boyle  on  the  Fulfilment  of  Script. 
Prophecy. 

Brown's  Harmony  of  Scripture  Pro- 
phecies. 

Chalmers's  Evidences  of  Christianity. 

Conybeare's  (Bp.)  Sermons. 

Flemming's  Fulfilling  of  Scripture. 

Gordon's  Christianity  Supported  by  P. 

Hey's  Lectures.  Chap.  1. 


i  Horsley's  (Bp.)  Sermons. 

Jenkins's    Eeasonableness    of    Chris- 
tianity. 

La  Pluehes's  Truth  of  the  Gospel. 

Paley's  Evidences.  Part  II.  ch.  1. 

Powell's  (Samuel)  Sermons. 

Skelton's  (P.)  Sermons. 

Warburton  Lectures,  viz.: 

Allwood,  1815.  Apthorp,  1786.  Ba- 
got,  1780.  Davidson,  1824.  Hali- 
fax, 1776.  Hurd,  1772.  Nares,  1805 
Nolan,  1837.  Pearson,  1811. 


HARMONY    OF    REVELATION   AND    SCIENCE. 


Bonar,  Concordia  Scientise  cum  Fide. 

1665.     (Curious.) 
Bouterwick's  Religion  und  Vernunft. 
D'Aubigne,  Foi  et  Science. 
Erdman's  Vorlesung.  zu  Glauben  u. 

AVissen. 
Kulin's  Glauben  und  Wissen. 
Pauvert,  Harmonic  de  la  Religion,  et 

de  I'Intelligence  humaine. 
Wiseman  (Nic.)Sur  le  Rapport  entre 

la  Science  et  la  Religion. 
American  Eclectic  Review.  2  :  186. 
American  Quarterly  Observer.   2  :  24. 


Bibliotheca   Sacra.     13:80.     14:338, 

461. 
Blackwood's  Magazine.  6  :  35. 
Bridgewater  Treatises. 
Brougham's  Advant.    and    Pleas,    of 

Science. 
Buckland's  Reliquiise  DiluviansB. 
Combes's    Relation   between    Science 

and  Religion. 
Dick's  Christian  Philosopher. 
Dingle's   Harm,   of    Revelation    and 

Science. 
D'Oyly's  (George)  Sermons. 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


571 


Exley  on  the  First  Chapter  of  Genesis. 

Farrar's  (Adam)  Sermons  at  Oxford. 

Forbes's  Progress  of  Science. 

Hampden's  Philosoph.  Evidence  of 
Christianity. 

Harcourt's  Doctrine  of  the  Dehige. 

Harris's  Pre-Adamite  Earth.  (Popu- 
hir.) 

Hitchcock's  Kelig.  Truth  illust.  from 
Science. 

London  Quarterly  Eeview.   79  :  49. 

Mailler's  Philosophy  of  the  Bible. 

Melville's  (Henry)  Sermons. 

Morell's  History  of  Philosophy  and 
Science. 

Nares's  Bampton  Lectures.     1805. 

Nolan's  Bampton  Lectures.     1833. 

North  American  Review.  89  :  293. 

Pendleton's  Science  a  Witness  for  the 
Bible. 

Pratt's  Scrip,  and  Science  not  at  Va- 
riance. 


Eagg's  Creation's  Testimonv  to  its 
God. 

Scott's  (Ft.  E.)  Limits  of  Physical 
Science. 

Silliman's  Consistency  of  the  Discov- 
eries of  Modern  Geology  with  Sa- 
cred History. 

[Taylor's]  Nat.  Hist,  of  Enthusiasm. 

'Troup's  (George)  Art  and  Faith. 

TuUidge's  Triumphs  of  the  Bible. 

Walker's  (James)  Sermons. 

Warburton's  (Bp.)  Sermons. 

Wiseman's  (Nic.)  Connection  between 
Science  and  Religion. 

Williams's  (Cha.)"  First  Week  of 
Time. 

Wood's  Mosaic  Creation  illustrated 
by  Discoveries  and  Experiments  in 
the  Present  Age.     1811. 

Worgan's  Divine  Week. 

Wright's  Creation  and  Geology. 


UNITY    OF    THE    HUMAN   RACE. 


Pro. 


De  Salles,  Hist,  generale  des  Races  hu- 
maines. 

Humboldt's  Ansichtender  Natur. 

Agassiz's  Origin  of  the  Human  Races. 
(Maintains  that  all  mankind  are  of 
one  species,  but  did  not  originate 
from  one  pair.) 

Amer.  Biblical  Repos.  2d  series. 
10 :  29. 

Bachman's  Doct.  of  the  Unity,  etc. 
examined  on  the  Principles  of 
Science. 

Cabell's  Testimony  of  Modern  Sci- 
ence to  the  Unity  of  Mankind. 

Caldwell's  Unity  of  the  Race  of  Man. 

Christian  Examiner.  49:111. 

Christian  Quart   Spect.  3  :  56. 

Christian  Review.   16  :  226. 

Dawson's  (J.  W.)  Archaia. 

Democratic  Review.   11  :  111. 

Hamilton's  Pentateuch  and  its  Assail- 
ants. 

Johnes's  Philological  Proofs  of  the 
Recent  Origin  of  the  Human  Race. 
(From  a  comparison  of  the  lan- 
guages of  Europe,  Asia,  Africa, 
and  America.) 

Kames's  Origin  and  Diversity  of 
Mankind. 

Knox's  Races  of  Men. 

Latham's  Varieties  of  Mankind. 

Man  and  his  Migrations. 

Lord's  Theol.  and  Lit.  Jour.  3:424. 

Meade's  (Bp.)  The  Bible  and  the 
Classics. 


Monthly  Review.   119:  18. 

North  Amer.  Rev.   73 :  163. 

North  British  Review.  4:177. 

Pickering  on  the  Races  of  Men. 

Presbyterian  Quarterly  Rev.  3:177. 

Prichard's  Physical  History  of  Man- 
kind. 

Princeton  Rev.  21:159.  22:313,603. 
31 : 103. 

Prot.  Episc.  Monthly  Review.  3  :  68. 

Quarterlj'  Review. 

Smith's  (Sam.  S.)  Causes  of  the  Di- 
versity of  Figure,  Color,  etc. 

Strictures  on  Lord  Kames. 

Smyth's  (Tho.)  Unity  of  the  Human 
Race.     (Reviews  Agassiz.) 

TuUidge's  (Henry)  Triumphs  of  th(^ 
Bible. 

Van  Arminge's  Natural  Historj-  of 
Man. 

Wartz's  Anthropology  of  the  Uncivil- 
ized Races. 

C07l. 

Gobineau's  Moral  and  Intellectual 
Diversity  of  Races.  Tr.  by  Hotz  ; 
with  notes. 

Morton's  (Dr.  S.  G.)  Types  of  Man- 
kind. 

Archaeology  of  the  Amer.  In- 
dians. 

Hybridity  in  Men  and  Animals. 

Crania  ^gyptiaca. 

Nott  &  Gliddon's  Types  of  Man- 
kind. 

Indigenous  Races  of  the  Earth. 


572 


INDEX   TO  AUTHORS. 


CANON    OF    SCRIPTURE. 


Cochlteus  de  Canonica  S.  S. 

Credner's  Geschichte  des  Canons. 

Fric'k  de  Cura  Vet.  Ece.  circa  Cano- 
nem  S.  S. 

Kortholtus  de  Canone. 

]Millii  Prolegomena  ad  Nov.  Test. 

Morus  de  Canone  Scriptural. 

Planck  de  Signif.  Canonis  in  Ecc. 
Antiq. 

Reuss,  Histoire  du  Canon,  etc. 

Schmidii  Vindicatio  Canonis  V.  et 
N.  T. 

Stroscli,  Hist,  critica  de  Librorum  N. 
T. 

Van  Mastricht,  Commentatio  de  Ca- 
none, etc. 

Weber's  Gesch.  des  Neutestamentl. 
Kanons. 

Wolfius  de  Integritate  Codicis  sacri. 

Alexander  (A.)  on  the  Canon  of  S.  S. 

Amer.  Quart.Church  Review.  17  :  583. 

Blair  (John)  on  the  Canon  of  Scrip- 
ture. 

Bryant's  (Jac.)  Authent.  of  the  Christ. 
Relig. 

Christian  Quart.  Spect.   10  :  69. 

Cosin's  Scholastic  Hist,  of  the  Canon. 

Dupin's  Complete  Hist,  of  the  Canon, 
etc. 


Findlay's  Vindication. 

Gaussen  on  the  Canon  of  Scripture. 

General  Repository.  4:1. 

Giles's  (J.  A.)  Hebrew  Records. 

Jenkins's  Reasonableness  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Jones's  (Jer.)  Method  of  settling  the 
Canon.   (Best  short  treatise.) 

Kitto's  Journal.   7  :  174. 

Lardner's  Credibility  of  the  Gospel 
Hist.  ^  ^ 

Antiquities. 

Nye  on  the  Canon. 

Owen's  Introd.  to  Comment,  on  He- 
brews. 

Prldeaux's  Connection  of  0.  and  N. 
Test. 

Richardson's  Vindication.  (Reply  to 
Toland's  Amyntor.) 

Stuart's  (Moses)  Defence  of  the  O.  T. 
Canon. 

Townley's  Illustrations  of  Biblical 
Literature. 

United  States  Literary  Gazette.  5 : 
327. 

Westcott's  Hist,  of  the  Canon  of  the 
N.  T.  during  the  First  Four  Centu- 
ries. 

Wads  worth's  Hulsean  Lectures.   1847. 


INSPIRATION. 


Carpzovius  de  Divina  In«piratione. 

Credner  de  Librorum  N.  T.  Inspira- 
tione. 

Dupin,  Prolegomena. 

Gaussen,  Theopneustie. 

Grotius  de  Veritate  Relig.  Christiame. 

Henrici  Lucubrationes. 

Huetii  Demonstratio  Evangelica. 

Potter,  Prelectiones  Theologicse. 

Quenstedtius  de  Divina  Inspiratione. 

Sontagii  de  Inspiratione,  ej  usque 
Ratio. 

Waltheri  (Mich.)  Dissertations. 

Appleton's  (Pres.)  Works.  Lect.  26, 
27. 

Bailey's  (Benj.)  Essay  on  Inspira- 
tion. 

Bannorman  on.  Inspiration. 

Bateman  (Josiah)  on  the  Inspiration, 
etc. 

Baylie's  (J.)  Authority  and  Inspira- 
tion, etc. 

Bennet's  (Benj.)  Sermons.  (Fourteen 
on  this  subj.) 

Bibliotheca  Sacra.  12:217.  15:29,314. 


Bingham    (W.   A.)   on    the  Insp.  of 
Scripture. 

Bogue's  (David)  Essays. 

Burgon's  Bible  and  Modern  Tliought. 

Burnet  on  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles. 
Art.  6. 

Butler's  Analogy  of  Relig.  and  Na- 
ture.    Part  II. 

Butler's  (W.)  Testimony  of  History. 

Calamy's  (Edmund)  Sermons. 

Calmet's  Dissertations. 

Campbell    (Geo.)    on    the   Four  Gos- 
pels. 

Carlyle's  Origin  and  Authority  of  the 

.     S.  Scr. 

Carson's  (A.)  Refutation  of  Hender- 
son. 

Review   of  Wilson,  Smith,  and 

Dick. 

Cellerier's  Divine  Origin  of  the  Old 
Testament. 

Chalmers's  Evidences  of  Christianity. 

Christ.    Examiner.      8:362.    32:119, 
204.  85:340. 

Christian  Review.  9:1.   12  :  219. 


INDEX  TO  AUTHORS. 


573 


Davidson's  (Sam.)  Text  of  O.  T.  con- 
sidered. 
Davies's   (S.)  Nature  of  the  Divine 

Agency  as  to  Inspiration. 
Diclv  (John)  on  Inspiration. 
Doddridge's  Dissertations  on  the  New 

Test. 
Dyer  on    the   Inspiration    of  Sacred 

Scripture. 
Eclectic    Review.     4th  Series.    1:91. 

11:365. 
Emmons's  (Nathaniel)  Sermons. 
Findlay's  Vindic.  of  the  Sacred  Books 
and  Josephus.    (Reply  to  Voltaire.) 
Fuller's  Part  of  a  Body  of  Divinity. 
Gasparin  on  Plenary  Inspiration. 
Gaussen's   Theopneustia.     Tr.  by  E. 

N.  Kirk. 
Gerard's  Institutes  of  Criticism. 
Haldane  (Robt.)  on  Inspiration. 
Hawker's  Evidence  of  Plenary  Inspi- 
ration. 
Henderson    (E.)    on  Divine  Inspira- 
tion. 
Hervey's  (A.)  Five  Sermons. 
Hinds  on  the  Inspiration  and  Autho- 
rity, etc. 
How'arth  on  Revealed  Religion. 
Jenkins's   Reasonableness   of    Chris- 
tianity. 
Kelly's  Exam,   of  Davidson's  State- 
ment. 
Kitto's  Journal.  5:437.  7:315. 
La  Mothe  on  Inspiration. 
Le  Clerc's  Letters. 

Lee's  Nature  and  Proofs  of  Inspira- 
tion. 
Leslie's  Easv  Method  with  Deists. 
Lond.  Quart.  Rev.  10 :  286. 
Lowe's   Insp.   a   Reality.     (Reply  to 

Macnaught.) 
Lowth's  (S.)  Insp.  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures. 
Lowth's    (W.)   Authority  and  Insp. 

of  Sac.  Scr. 
McGaul's  Testimonies  to  the  Autho- 
rity, etc. 
Macleod"s  View  of  Inspiration. 
Macnaught  on  Inspiration. 
Marston's  Manual  on  the  Inspiration, 

etc. 
Methodist  Quart.  Review.  5 :  594. 
Michaelis's  Introd.  to  the  New  Test. 

Ch.  3. 
Middleton's  Miscellaneous  Works. 
Morell's  Philosophv  of  Religion. 
Morris's  (A.  G.)  The  Biblej^What  is 

it? 
New  Englander.   7:515. 


Newton  (Bp.)  on  the  Prophecies. 

Noble  on  Plenary  Inspiration. 

Paley's  Evidences  of  Christianity. 

Parry  on  the  Insp.  of  the  Apostles. 

Powell's  Nature  and  Extent  of  Inspi- 
ration. 

Prettyman's  Elements  of  Christian 
Theologv. 

Princeton  Review.  29  :  598,  660. 

Redford's  Holy  Scriptures  verified  by 
Science,  History,  and  Human  Con- 
sciousness. 

Scott's  (Thomas)  Essays. 

Seeker's  (Abp.)  Sermons. 

Seed's  Sermons  at  the  Mover  Lecture. 
1747. 

Simpson's  Plea  for  the  Sacred  Writ- 
ings. (A  masterly  refutation  of 
Deism.) 

Spirit  of  the  Pilgrims.  1 :  402, 474,  624. 
2  :  9,  70,  185,  237,  289.  3  :  369,  420. 

Stennet's  Authority  and  Use  of  Scrip- 
ture. 

Storr  on  the  Historical  Sense. 

Stuart's  (Moses)  Critical  History  and 
Defence  of  the  Old  Testament 
Canon. 

Taylor's  (D.)  Truth  and  Insp.  of 
Scripture. 

Thomson's  (Alex.)  Lectures. 

Tillotson's  Sermons. 

Tomline's  Introd.  to  the  Study  of 
Scripture. 

Townscnd's  (George)  Works. 

Van  Mildert's  (William)  Sermons. 

Vaughn's  (J.)  Lectures.     Lect.  9. 

Wardlaw's  (Ralph)  Discourses. 

Watson's  (Rich.)  'Theological  Tracts. 

Apology  for  the  Bible. 

Westcott's  Elements  of  Gospel  Har- 
mony. 

Wettenhall's  Div.  Authority  of  Sac. 
Script. 

Whitehead's  (Robt.)  Warrant  of 
Faith. 

Whittington's  Inspiration  of  the  Old 
Test. 

Whitby's  Preface  to  Commentary  on 
N.  T. 

Wilkinson's  (T.)  Inspiration  of  Scrip- 
ture. 

Williams's  (Bp.)  Boyle  Lectures.  1695, 
1696. 

Wilson  (Bp.)  on  Plenary  Inspiration. 

Wilson's  (John)  Essay  on  Enthusi- 
asm. 

Wood's  (Leonard)  Works. 

Wordsworth's  Five  Lectures  in  West- 
minster Abbey.     1861. 


574 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


BIBLICAL   HISTORY. 


Alexandri  Historia  Eccles.  Vet.  Test. 

Alliolis  Biblischen  Alterthumskunde. 

Andilljr,  Histoire  de  I'ancien  Testa- 
ment. 

Basnage,  Histoire  du  rieux  Testa- 
ment. 

Bcrruyer,  Histoire  du  People  de  Dieu. 

Bndd:i?i  Historia  Ecclesiastica  V.  T. 

Capelli  Historia  Sacra  et  Exotica. 

Carpzovii  Apparatus  Historia;  Criti- 
cus. 

Eusebii  Chronicon. 

Heideggeri  Historia  Patriarcharum. 

Hornii  Historia  Ecclesiastica. 

Joseph i  Opera. 

Kurtz's  Biblische  Geschichte. 

Langii  Historia  Ecclesiastica  Yet. 
Test. 

Leydecker,  Historia  Eccles.  Yet.  et  N. 
Test. 

Nichol,  Hist.  Sacra.  (Acta  Erud. 
1712.) 

Robinson,  Annales  Mundi,  sacri  et 
secularis. 

Saurin,  Discours  historiques,  cri- 
tiques, etc. 

Schmidii  Compendium.  (Acta  Erud. 
1708.)    • 

Selden  de  Diis  Syriis. 

Simon,  Hist,  critique  du  Yieux  Test. 

Spanheim,  In  trod,  ad  Hist,  et  Antiq. 
Sac. 

Spondanii  Annalos  Sacri  a  Creatione. 

Vitringffi  Hypotyposis. 

Yossii  Historia  de  Idolatria. 

Witsii  Miscellanea  Sacra. 

Basnage's  History  of  the  Jews. 

Bedford's  Scripture  Chronology  de- 
monstrated by  Astronomical  Cal- 
culation. 

Bell's  Mission  of  St.  John. 

Biscoe's  Hist,  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apos- 
tles confirmed  from  other  Authors. 

Blome's  Hist,  of  the  Old  and  JSTew 
Test. 

Calmet's  History  of  the  Old  and  New 
Test. 

Clarke's  Bible  History.  (Malachi  to 
Christ.)  ' 

Craddock's  Hist,  of  the  0.  Test,  meth- 
odized. 


Craddock's  Apostolical  History  meth- 
odized. 

Ellwood's  Sacred  Hist,  of  the  0.  and 
N.  T. 

Fleury's  Hist,  of  the  Israelites. 

Gale's  Court  of  the  Gentiles. 

Geneste's  Parallel  Histories  of  Judah 
and  Israel.     (Yaluable  matter.) 

Gleig's  (G.  R.)  History  of  the  Bible. 
(Maps.) 

Hall's  (Bp.)  Contemplations. 

Hawker's  (Robt.)  Extracts  and  Notes. 

Hawkins's  Objects  and  Uses  of  the 
Historical  Scriptures  of  the  O.  T. 

Howard's  Scripture  History  of  the 
Earth. 

Howell's  Hist,  of  the  Bible.   (Plates.) 

Jamieson's  Use  of  Sacred  History. 

Jones's  (Jos.)  Chronol.  and  Analysis 
of  Sc. 

Kimpton's  History  of  the  Bible. 

Kurtz's  History  of  the  Old  Covenant. 
Trans,  by  J.  Martin. 

Kurtz's  (J.  G.)  Manual  of  Sacred 
History.  (Learned  and  interest- 
ing.) 

Palfrey's  (J.  G.)  Academical  Lec- 
tures. 

Parker's  (S.)  Old  Test.  Illustrated. 

Shuckford's  Connection  of  Sac.  and 
Prof.  Hist. 

Simon's  Critical  History  of  the  Old 
Test. 

Smith's  History  of  the  Old  Testament. 

History  of  the  New  Testament. 

Stackhouse's  Hist,  of  the  Bible.  (Poor.) 

Stillingfleet's  Origines  Sacrse. 

Thompson's  (And.)  Scripture  His- 
tory. 

Trimmer's  Sacred  History. 

Watts 's  (Isaac)  Scripture  History. 

Wheeler's  (J.  S.)  Analysis  of  N.  Test. 
Hist.   (Yery  valuable.) 

Winder's  History  of  Knowledge. 

There  exists  a  vast  multitude  of 
Bible  histories,  but  few  are  as  lucid 
and  interesting  as  the  Bible  itself. 
Some,  however,  are  useful  as  school- 
books,  and  some  as  works  of  general 
reference. 


DEISM. 

Pro.  I  Bodini  (Joann.)  Colloquium. 

Barthius  (Jo.  Henr.)  de   Yera   Reli-    Celsii  Opera, 
gione.  I  Chawin,  de  Naturali  Religione. 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


575 


Connor,  Evangelium  Medici. 

Constant  (B.),  Keligion  consideree 
dans  ses  Sources,  ses  Formes,  etc. 

De  la  Serre,  Examen  de  la  Religion. 

Diderot,  Pensees  philosophiques. 

Gebhard,  Cogitationes  rationales. 

Gunlingii  Observationes  Selects. 

Herbert  de  Veritate.  (The  first  to 
make  Deism  a  science.     1624.) 

de  Causis  Errorum. 

de  Eeligione  Gentilium. 

Hobbesii  Opera  Philosophica. 

Holbach,  Christianisme  devoile. 

Langsdorf  s  Gott  and  die  Natur. 

Leibnitz,  Opera  Theologica. 

Machiavellii  Discursisin  Livium. 

Meyeri  Philosophia. 

Mirabaud,  Systemede  la  Nature. 

Muralt,  sur  la  Religion  essentielle. 

Parizot,  la  Foi  devoilee  par  la  Raison. 

Peyrerii  Preadamitae. 

Roell,  de  Religione  Naturali. 

ivousseau,  Confessions,  etc. 

Emile. 

Various  other  works. 

Sue,  Lettres  sur  la  Religion. 

Yanini  Amphitheatruni. 

Voltaire,  Epitre  a  Urane. 

Lettres  philosophiques. 

Various  other  Works. 

Blount's  Anima  Musedi. 

Life  of  ApoUonius  Tyaneus. 

Oracles  of  Reason. 

Bolingbroke's  Letters  on  History. 

Philosophical  Religion. 

Various  other  works. 

Browne's  Religio  Medici. 

Chubb's  Discourse  on  Miracles. 

Foundation  of  the  Christ.  Reli- 
gion. 

Subjects  of  the  Old  Testament. 

True  Gospel  of  Christ  asserted. 

on  Redemption. 

Four  Dissertations. 

Collection  of  Tracts. 

Previous  Question. 

Collins's  Enquiry  into  Human  Lib- 
erty. 

Ground  of  the  Christian  Reli- 
gion. 

on  Free  Thinking. 

Scheme  of  Literal  Prophecy. 

Man's  other  Voices. 

Vind.  of  the  Divine  Attributes. 

Elwell  on  the  Incarnation. 

English's  Grounds  of  Christianity 
examined. 

Evanson's  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

Dissonance  of  the  Evangelists. 


Evanson's  Letter  to  Dr.  Hurd. 

Letter  to  Dr.  Priestley. 

Hartlej'  on  the  Human  Mind. 

Hobbes's  Historical  Narration  of  Her- 
esy. 

Human  Nature. 

Letter  on  Liberty  and  Necessity. 

Letter  to  the  Duke  of  Newcastle. 

Leviathan. 

Hume's  Essay  on  Miracles. 

Treatise  on  Human  Nature. 

Dialogues. 

Kames's  (Lord)  Essays. 

Lyon's  Infallibility  of  Human  Judg- 
ment. 

Morgan's  Moral  Philosopher. 

Deism  fairly  stated. 

Conceptions  of  the  Jews  con- 
sidered. 

Defence  of  the  Moral  Philoso- 
pher. 

Physico-Theology. 

Reply  to  Chandler. 

Sacerdotism  displaj^ed. 

New  Harmony  Gazette.  Pub.  from 
1825  to  1834,  by  R.  Dale  Owen. 

Newman's  (F.  W.)  Theism. 

Paine 's  Age  of  Reason.  (Numerous 
replies,  viz.,  by  Disney,  Drew,  Est- 
lin,  McNeille,  Scott,  Simpson,  "Wat- 
son, etc.) 

Palmer's  Principles  of  Nature. 

Shaftesbury's  Charac.  of  Men,  Man- 
ners, etc. 

Syke's  Innocency  of  Error. 

Taylor's  Translation  of  the  Argu- 
ments of  Celsus,  Porphyry,  and  Ju- 
lian. 

Tindall's  Christianity  as  old  as  Crea- 
tion. 

Toland's  Amyntor. 

Pantheisticon. 

Christianity  not  Mysterious. 

Volney's  Works. 

Woolston's  Discourses  on  Miracles. 

Defence  of  do. 

Moderator. 

Supplement  to  Moderator. 

Second  Supplement  to  Moderator. 

A  multitude  of  other  Deistical  wri- 
ters might  be  cited,  especially  in  the 
German  language,  but  the  arguments 
are  the  same  in  all. 

Con. 
Origen,  contra  Celsus. 
Abbadie,   Verite  de   la   Relig.  chre- 

tienne. 


576 


INDEX  TO  AUTHORS. 


Baumgarten,  Opera. 

Bergier,  Deisnie  refute  par  lui-meme. 

Bullet,  Beponses  critiques.  (Befutes 
many  cavils  of  the  infidels  of  the 
18th  century.) 

Carpzovii  Apparatus  Historico-criti- 
cus. 

Crouzas,  Examen  du  Pyrronisme, 
ancienne  et  moderne. 

Deylingii  Observationes  Sacrae. 

Diecanni  Schediasma  de  Naturalismo. 

Fabrieii  Delectus  Argumentorum 
Veritat.  Beligionis  Christ,  versus 
Atheos,  Deistas,  Judaeos,  etc. 

Grotius,  de  Veritate  Belig.  Christianse. 

Houtteville,  le  Christianisme  prouve 
par  les  Faits. 

Huetii  Damonstratio. 

Jacquelot,  Defense  de  la  Beligion. 

Kortholtus  de  Tribus  Impostoribus. 
(Herbert,  Hobbes,  and  Spinoza.) 

Langii  Causa  Dei  et  Beligionis. 

Le  Clerc,  de  I'Incredulite. 

Lemper,  Vorbericht  der  Nachricht. 

Less's  Wahrheitder  Christl.  Beligion. 

Limborch  de  Veritate  Bel.  Christ. 

Loescheri  Prenotiones  Theologies. 

Mersen,  Impiete  des  Deistes. 

Mussel  (Jo.)  Dissertatio.  {^Contra 
Herbert. ) 

Noesselt's  Wahrheit  und  Gottlich- 
keit,  etc. 

Olearii  Synopsis  Controversiarum. 

Pfafl'ii  (Chr.)  Dissertationes. 

Picteti  (Benedict.)  Dissertationes. 

Placctte,  Beponse  a  M.  Bayle. 

Bosemond,  Defense  de  la  Eel.  chre- 
tienne. 

Stein's  Apologetik  der  OfFenbarung. 

Titius  de  Insutficientia  Bel.  naturalis. 

Tribbechovii  Historia  Naturalismi. 

Trin's  Freydencker  Lexicon. 

Turretin  de  Veritate  et  Divinitate, 
etc. 

"Wolfli  Manichneismus  ante  Mani- 
chseos. 

Wellii  Oratio  in  Collinum. 

Allix's  Beflections  on  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. 

Applegarth  on  the  Human  Under- 
standing. 

Apthorp's  (East)  Prevalence  of  Chris- 
tianity before  its  Civil  Establish- 
ment. (Gives  a  verj*  useful  account 
of  civil  and  ecclesiastical  historians. ) 

Asgill's  (J.)  Beply  to  AVoolston  on 
Miracles. 

Atkinson  on  Christianity.  (Beplv  to 
Tindall.) 


Atkinson's  Bemarks  on  a  Late  Work. 
(Beply  to  Morgan.) 

Atkey's  Examination  of  "  Christi- 
anity as  old  as  Creation." 

Ayscough  on  Gospel  Obedience. 

Balguy's  Letters  to  a  Deist. 

Bates's  Infidelity  Scourged.  (Beply 
to  Chubb.) 

Beard's  Christian  Belig.  defended 
from  the  Assaults  of  Owenism. 

Belknap's  Dissertation.  (Answer  to 
Paine.) 

Benson's  Answer  to  Morgan. 

Bentley's  Bemarks  on  a  Late  Dis- 
course, etc.  (A  powerful  answer  to 
Collins.)    • 

Bergier's  Deism  Self-confuted. 

Berkeley's  Minute  Philosopher. 

Berriman's  Boyle  Lectures.  .  1730. 

Bidlack's  Bampton  Lectures.     1811. 

Bliss's      Observations.  (Beplv    to 

Chubb.) 

Bolton's  Hulsean  Prize  Essay.     1852. 

Boyle  Lectures.   (Annual  since  1692.) 

Boyle  on  Things  above  Beason. 

on  the  Besurrection. 

Bradlev's  Impartial  View.  (Ans.  to 
Blount.) 

Branihall  against  Hobbes. 

Broadley  on  the  Evidences,  Internal 
and  External,  of  the  Beligion  of 
Moses. 

Broughton's  Answer  to  Tindall. 

Brown  (Bp.)  on  the  Human  Under- 
standing. 

Brown's  Essay  on  the  "  Characteris- 
tics." 

Burnett's  Scriptural  Doctrine  of  Be- 
demption.     (Beply  to  Morgan.) 

Butler's  Analogy  of  Beligion  and 
Mature. 

Calamy's  Sermons. 

Campbell  on  Miracles. 

Cary's  (S.)  Beview  of  English's 
"  Grounds  of  Christianity." 

Chalmers's  Evidences  of  Christianity. 

Chandler  (Edw.)  on  the  Prophecies  of 
the  O.  Test.     (Beply  to  Collins.) 

Chandler's  (S.)  Vind.  of  the  Christ. 
Beligion. 

on  the  Conduct  of  Modern  Deists. 

Antiquity  and  Authority  of  the 

Prophecies  of  Daniel. 

Seasons  for  being  a  Christian. 

on  the  History  of  the  Old  and 

New  Testaments.     (Beply  to  Mor- 
gan.) 

Chichester's  Deism  and  Christianity. 

Chapman's  Eusebiu^. 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


577 


Chapman's  Keply  to  Morgan  and  Tin- 
dall. 

Kemarks   on    the  Prophecies  of 

Daniel.     (Keply  to  Collins.) 

Clark's  (Dr.)  Reflections  on  that  part 
of  the  book  called  Amyntor,  which 
relates  to  the  Writings  of  the  Primi- 
tive Fathers. 

Clayton's  Vindication  of  Scripture. 
(Keply  to  Bolingbroke.) 

Collyer's  Lectures. 

Conj'beare's  Defence  of  Keligion. 
(Keply  to  Tindall.  "The  best- 
reasoned  book  in  the  world." — 
Warburton.) 

Curtis's  Folly  and  Danger  of  Infidelity 

Dalrymple's  Inquiry  into  the  Second- 
ary Causes  which  Mr.  Gibbon  as- 
signs for  the  Kapid  Progress  of 
Christianity. 

Delany's  Kevelation  examined  with 
Candor. 

Ditton  on  Christ's  Resurrection. 

Doddridge's  Lectures.     Part  VI. 

Answer  to  Chubb. 

Dwight's  Discourses.  (Infidel  Phi- 
losophy.) 

Earbury's  Deism  Refuted. 

Eclectic  Review.   New  Series.  3 :  253. 

Edinburgh  Review.   2  :  661. 

Ellis  on  Hume's  Essay  on  Miracles. 

Entick's     Evidences.  ( Reply    to 

Woolston.) 

Everett's  (E.)  Defence  of  Christi- 
anity. 

Fenton's  Lady  Moyer's  Lectures. 
1728. 

Fleming's  (Caleb)  Truth  and  Deism 
at  Variance. 

Forbes  (D.)  on  Incredulity. 

Foster's  (James)  Usefulness  and  Truth 
of  Christianitv.  (Answer  to  Tin- 
dall.) 

Frothingham  (N.  L.)  on  Deism. 

Fuller's  Gospel  its  Own  Witness. 

Gassendi's  Answer  to  Herbert's  De 
Veritate. 

Gastrell's  Certaint_y  of  Christianity. 

Gibson's  Pastoral  Letters. 

Gilderdale  on  Nat.  and  Rev.  Religion. 

Giles's  (Rev.  Dr.)  Christian  Records. 

Girdlestone's  Anatomy  of  Skepticism. 

Graves's  Lectures  on  the  Pentateuch. 

Evidences  of  Christ's  Resurrec- 
tion.  (Reply  to  Woolston.) 

Gurdon's  Boyle  Lectures.  1721  and 
1722. 

Gregory's  (Olinthus)  Evidences,  etc. 

Grove  (H.)  on  Onrist's  Resurrection. 


Haldane  (Robt.)  on  Divine  Revela- 
tion. 

Hallet  on  Providence.   (Powerful.) 

Hall's  (Robt.)  Infidelity  considered 
with  reference  to  its  Influence  on 
Society. 

Halyburton's  Inquiry.  (Reply  to  Her- 
bert.) 

Hamilton's  Pentateuch  and  its  A.ssail- 
ants. 

Harris's  Reasonableness  of  Believing. 

Home's  (Geo.)  Letters  on  Infidelity. 

Home's  (T.  H.)  D.  Refuted.  (Many 
editions.) 

Hulsean  Lectures.  Commenced  1820. 
(The  Lectures  by  Benson,  1820, 
Franks,  1821,  Wordsworth,  1848, 
Curry,  1852,  and  others,  are  very 
;ible,  and  are  printed  separately.) 

Ibbot's  (Benj.)  Boyle  Lectures.  1721, 
1722. 

Jackson's  (J.)  Examination.  (Ans. 
to  Chubb.) 

Plea  for  Reason.  (Rep.  to  Tin- 
dall.) 

Address  to  Deists. 

Jeftry's  True  Grounds  and  Reasons. 

Jew's  Letters  to  Voltaire.  (By  Guin- 
nee.) 

Johnston's  Christ,  older  than  Crea- 
tion. 

Jones  on  the  Canon.  (Reply  to  To- 
land.) 

Jortin's  (J.)  Discourses. 

Kidder's  Demonstration  of  the  Mes- 
.siah. 

King's  Origin  of  Evil. 

La  Ci'osse's  Animad.  on  "  Oracles  of 
Reason." 

Lardner's  Credibility  of  the  Gospel 
History. 

— - —  Circumstances  of  the  Jews. 

Lavington  on  the  Types.  (Reply  to 
Collins.) 

Law's  Case  of  Reason.  (Reply  to  Tin- 
dall.) 

Lawson's  Exam,  of  Hobbes's  "  Le- 
viathan." 

Le  Clerc's  Causes  of  Incredulitj*. 

Leek's  Interpretation  of  the  Law  and 
Prophets.    (Reply  to  Woolston.) 

Leslie's  Short  Method  with  Deists. 

Less's  Authority,  Preservation,  and 
Credibility,  etc.  (Trans,  bj'  King- 
don.) 

Lindsay  (H.)  on  Infidelity. 

Lobb's  Defence  of  Relig.  (Ans.  to 
Collins.) 

London  Quart.  Review.   3:1. 


37 


578 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


Lowman's  Hebrew  Government. 

— —  on  Prophecy.     (Ans.  to  Collins.) 

Lyttleton  on  the  Conversion  of  St. 
Paul.  ("A  treatise  to  which  infi- 
delity has  never  been  able  to  fabri- 
cate a  specious  answer." — Dr.  John- 
son.) 

Maltby's  (E.^  Illustrations. 

Mangey's  Reply  to  Toland's  Naza- 
renus. 

Markland  on  Miracles.  (Ans.  to 
Woolston.) 

Marshall  on  the  Seventy  AVeeks, 
(Ans.  to  Collins.) 

McKnight's  Truth  of  the  Gospel  His- 
tory, j 

Middleton's  Case  of  Abraham  de- 
fended. 

Moss  (Bp.)  on  the  Resurrection. 

Movne  on  Miracles.  (Replv  to 
Chubb.) 

Nares's  Bam]iton  Lectures.   1805. 

Nash's  Standard  of  Truth.  (Ans.  to 
Paine.) 

Newcombe  on  the  Character  of  the 
Saviour. 

Sure  Word  of  Prophecj'. 

Newton  (Bp.)  on  the  Prophecies. 

Nichols's  Conference  with  a  Theist. 

Nisbet's  Triumphs  of  Christianity. 

Norrison  on  Reason  and  Faith. 

Ogilvie  on  the  Cause  of  Skepticism. 
(Remarks  on  Herbert,  Shaftesbury, 
Bolingbroke,  Hume,  and  Gibbon.) 

Paley's  Evidences. 

Horte  PauliniB. 

Patton's  (Will.)  Christianitv  the  True 
Theology.   (Reply  to  Paine.) 

Pearson's  (Geo.)  Hulsean  Lectures. 

Porteus's  Summary  of  Evidence. 

Potter's  Authority  of  the  O.  and  N. 
Testam. 

Prideaux's  Letter  to  Deists. 

Pye's  Moses  and  Bolingbroke. 

Reynolds's  Letter  to  a  Deist. 

Richardson's  Hist,  and  Def.  of  the 
Canon. 

Riddle's  Bampton  Lectures.   1852. 

Roberts's  Christianity  Vindicated. 
(Reply  to  Volney.) 

Robinson's  Usefulness  of  Revelation. 

Distinguishing  Char,  of  the  Gos- 
pel. 

Rogers's  Reply  to  Collins. 

Eight  Sermons. 

Ross's  Reply  to  Hobbes's  Leviathan. 

Rotheram's  Truth  of  Christianity. 

Rust's  Discourse  on  the  Use  of  Reason. 
Ryhuid  (J. 'I  on  Infidelity.   1848. 


Schmucker's  Modern  Infidelity. 

Scott  on  Inspiration.  (Reply  to 
Paine.) 

Seaton's  Compendious  View.  (Reply 
to  Woolston.) 

Sherlock's  Use  of  Prophecy.  (Agt. 
Collins.) 

Shuttleworth's  .Consistency  of  the 
Scheme  of  Prov.  with  itself  and 
with  Human  Reason, 

Skelton's  Works.  (Reviews  all  the 
principal  deistical  writers.) 

Smith's  (Elisha)  Cure  of  Deism. 

Smith's  (Sam.  Stanhope)  Lectures, 

Squier's  Christ,  founded  on  Reason. 

Stackhouse's  State  of  the  Controversy, 

Staples's  Polemic  Theology. 

Stebbins's  Defence  of  Christian  His- 
tory. 

Advantage  of  Revelation, 

Boyle  Lectures.  1747. 

Charge  to  the  Clergy. 

Stephens  (W.)  on  the  Growth  of  De- 
ism. 

Stephenson  on  the  Miracles  of 
Christ. 

Stillingfleet's  Letters  to  a  Deist. 

Sykes  (Ashley)  on  the  Christian  Reli- 
gion.  (Answer  to  Collins.) 

on  Phlagon's  Eclipse. 

[Taylor's  (H.)]  Ben  Mordecai's  Apol- 
ogy- 
Taylor  (Nath.)  Preserv.  against  De- 
ism. 

Tenison's  Creed  of  Hobbes  exam- 
ined. 

Thompson's  (H.)  Infidelity  confuted 
on  its  own  Grounds. 

Tillotson's  Sermons. 

Toulmin's  (J.)  Dissertations. 

Walpole's  (R.)  Misrepresentations, Ig- 
norance, and  Plagiarism  of  Infidel 
Writers. 

Warburton's  View  of  Bolingbroke'.'* 
Philos. 

Divine  Legation  of  Moses, 

Waterland's  Scripture  Vindicated, 
(Reply  to  Tindall.) 

Watson's  Apology  for  Christianity. 
(Repljr  to  Gibbon.) 

•  Apology  for  the  Bible.     (Reply 

to  Paine.) 

Webster  on  the  Jewish  Dispensation, 
(Reply  to  Morgan.) 

West  on  the  Resurrection  of  Christ. 

Whately's  Historic  Doubts  ndative  to 
Napoleon  Buonaparte. 

Whiston's  Account  of  Scripture  Pro- 
phecie.s. 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


579 


Whiston's  Examination  of  late  Dis- 
courses.    (Keply  to  Collins.) 

Reason  and  Philosophy  no  Ene- 
mies. 

Whitby's  Necessity  and  Use  of  Eeve- 
lation. 

Wilson's  (John)  Dissertation  on 
Christianity.  (A  powerful  work, 
built  on  Butler's  Analogy.) 


Witherspoon's      Works.      (Lectures. 

Lecture  8.) 
Witty 's  First  Principles  of  Deism. 

See  large  lists  of  writers  tm  the  de- 
istical  controversy  in  Leland  on 
Deistical  Writers,  and  Van  Mil- 
dert's  Boyle  Lectures. 


INFIDELITY. 


Callenbergii    Comment,  de  Scepticis- 

mo. 
Frantz,  Briefe  an  einen  Zweifler. 
Holwerda,  de  Veterum  Scepticor.  Sen- 

tentia. 
Meisneri  Historia  Doctrina?    de  vero 

Deo. 
Merault,  lesApologistes  involontaires. 
(Christianity  proved  by  the  obser- 
vations of  Infidels.) 
Seligmani     Exeroitationes   Academi- 

C3e. 
Voetii  (Gisbert.)  Dissertationes. 
Vries,  Exercitationes  Ratit>nales. 
Amer.  Biblical  Eepos.  10 :  89. 
Anderson's  Remonstrance.    (Ag.  Bo- 

lingbroke.) 
Auchincloss's     Sophistries    of     Tho. 

Paine. 
Barnes's  Certainty    of  the  Christian 

Religion. 
Barrow's    (Isaac)     Sermons    on    the 

Creed. 
Baxter's     Unreasonableness    of  Infi- 
delity. 
Beecher's  (Ly.)   Lectures  on  Skepti- 
cism. 
Berkeley's      Principles     of     Human 

Knowledge. 
Bibliotheca  Sacra.   1 5  :  693. 
Bidlake's  Bampton  Lectures.   1811. 
Birk's   Difficulties    of    Belief  in    the 

Creation  and  Fall.    (Profound.) 
Blake's  Infidelity  Inexcusable. 
Bradford's  (Sam.)  Discourses. 
Brough  ton's      Christianity     Distinct 
from  the  Religion  of  Nature. 

Common  Doctrine  of  the  Soul. 

Brown's  System  of  Natural  and  Re- 
vealed Religion. 
Christian  Disciple.    3  :  332. 
Christian  Examiner.  17  :  23,  332. 
Christian  Month.  Spect.  6:  75. 
Christian  Observer.   12  :  215. 
Christian  Quart.  Spect.  5  :  469. 
Christian  Review.   2:271.  3:134.    G: 

191. 
Crichton's  Converts  from  Infidelity. 


Davies's  Two  Antichrists,  Infidelity 
and  Romanism,  viewed  in  their  Rel- 
ative Bearings.   (As  in  1856.) 

Disney's  (John)  Sermons. 

Dove's  Logic  of  the  Christian  Faith. 

Duncan's  Libertine  led  to  Reflection. 

Dwight's  (Tim.)  Nature  and  Danger 
of  Infidelity. 

Eclectic  Rev.  New  Series.  6:  740. 

Edinburgh  Monthly  Review.  3:60. 

Estlin's  (John  P.)  Senr.uns 

Evans's  (John)  Sermons. 

Evans's  (J.  H.)  Checks  to  Infidelity. 

Faber's  Difficulties  of  Infidelity. 

Farrer's  Bampton  Lectures.   1862. 

Finch's  Bampton  Lectures.    1797. 

Forbes  (D. )  on  the  Snurces  of  Incre- 
dulity. 

Foster's  (James)  Sermons. 

Gale's  Anatomy  of  Infidelity. 

Girdlestone"s  Prot^ress  of  Skepticism 
in  England.   1863. 

Grant's  Foes  of  our  Faith,  and  how  to 
defeat  tliem. 

Grisenthwaite's  Refutation  of  Tho. 
Paine. 

Hallet's  Consistent  Christian. 

Hennel's  (Miss)  Christianity  and  In- 
fidelity. 

Hodge's"(Cha.)  Essays  and  Reviews. 

Hooker's  Popular  Infidelity. 

Law's  Appeal  to  all  who  doubt  the 
Gospel. 

Leng's  Boyle  Lectures.   1719. 

Mansel's  Limits  of  Religious  Thought. 

McBurnie's  Errors  of  Infidetity. 
("An  armor}',  hung  all  over  with 
keen  weapons." — Evang.  Mag.) 

Michaelis's  Introd.  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

Moore's  Christian  System  Vindicated. 
Morgan's  Christianity  and  3Iodern  I. 

compared. 
Neaie's    (Erskine)    Christianity    and 
Infidelity  contrasted.     (An  account 
of  the   deaths  of  many  prominent 
persons.) 
Nelson's  Cause  and  Cure  of  Infidelity. 


580 


INDEX   TO   AUTHORS. 


New  York  Review.  2  :  483. 

Nichols's  Conference  with  a  Theist. 

North  British  Rev.  15:  18. 

Ogilvie  on  the  Causes  of  Infidelity. 

Pearson's  (Geo.)  Character  and  Tend- 
ency of  Infidelity. 

Post's  Skeptical  Era  in  Modern  His- 
tory. 

Princeton  Review.    12:31. 

Quarterly  Review.  28  :  493. 

Ragg's  Creation's  Testimony  to  its 
God. 

Rennel's  (Tho.)  Remarks  on  Skepti- 
cism. (An  answer  to  Bichat,  Mor- 
gan, etc.,  on  questions  touching  or- 
ganization and  life.) 

Ripley's  (Geo.)  Latest  Form  of  Infi- 
delity.  (Viz.,  German  theology.) 

Schmucker's  (S.  S.)  Errors  of  Modern 
Infidelity. 

Seed's  (Jeremiah)  Sermons. 

Simpson's  (David)  Plea  for  Religion. 

Smith's  (Sam.  Stanhope)  Sermons. 

Smith's  (Sydney)  Sermons. 

Smith  (Cha. )  Shadow  of  Death. 
(Prize  essay.) 

Spear's  Creed  of  Despair.  (Prize  es- 
say. ) 


Spirit  of  the  Pilgrims.  6:204.  8:1, 
447. 

Stanhope's  Truth  of  the  Christian 
Religion. 

Stebbings's  Christianity  Justified. 

Stillingfleet's  (Bp.)  Sermons. 

Thompson's  French  Philosophy. 

Tretfrey's  Infidel's  Own  Book. 

Turner's  Boyle  Lectures.   1709. 

Valpy  on  the  Course  of  Nature. 

Van  Mildert's  Boyle  Lectures.  1802. 
(A  historical  review  of  the  rise  and 
progress  of  infidelity,  with  able 
reasonings.) 

Wilberforce's  Practical  View  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Young's  (Edw.)  Centaur  not  Fabu- 
lous. 

Young's  (J.  R.)  Modern  Skepticism 
viewed  in  relation  to  Modern  Sci- 
ence. 1865.  (Specially  notices  Co- 
lenso,  Huxley,  Lyell,  and  Darwin.) 

In  Faber's  Difficulties  of  Infidelity., 
New  Y'ork  edition,  1858,  is  given  a 
list  of  all  the  books  known  to  have 
been  written  on  the  evidence  of  re- 
vealed religion. 


